Loving Trump's attorney in the immunity hearing, arguing that the President could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, and if not impeached, could not be prosecuted criminally.* Actually, that was a hypothetical put to him, but it didn't sway his argument at all.
Biden might be giving that one consideration, if it flies ? He'd be impeached - but it would solve the 'should I run again ?' and 'what about Donald' problems at a stroke.
*And also, if he were impeached, could not be criminally tried, as that would constitute double jeopardy...
That Trump's attorney leads on the immunity argument tells us. I think, that his legal team thinks he's vulnerable on Amendment 14 and being found to be an insurrectionist on the facts. And also that Colorado and other states do have the theoretical right to exclude Trump from the ballot regardless of what other states do.
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
I remember children being called monkeys all the time at primary school, but since everyone was white it probably wasn't a problem.
I grew up in the outskirts of Birmingham. In the 1970s we only had less than half a dozen Afro-Carribean heritage boys at school back then. I bet you can't guess which less than half a dozen boys were referred to as "monkeys" on a regular basis.
IF you had matriculated in USA, and called a Black kid a "monkey" you'd have been consuming breakfast, lunch and dinner through a straw for some time.
For context, knew a Black guy who told me this story: when he was in high school, a "humorist" asked him, "Hey, where's your spear?"
Answer - "Up you Mama's rear!" That shitfaced clown got off easy, because my friend was a really nice person.
We had racially questionable TV shows such as 'Til Death Us Do Part, Mind Your Language, Love thy neighbour and even the blackface Black and White Minstrel Show. With hindsight that was insane. Three black footballers were dubbed the Three Degrees by their coach Ron Atkinson. Atkinson lost a summariser role on TV around 15 years ago for racially inappropriate comments. As a nation we were very unaware. We are much more enlightened today.
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
Time to roll out my colleague's story about his wife. On a crowded train with their 3-yr old. 3-yr old looks over to black guy sitting opposite and says "you're a monkey". Complete guy coming through the saloon swinging doors piano player stops playing silence. And my colleague's wife looks at her son and says, without missing a beat - "no, you're a monkey".
"In an article from the BBC website, several former Fujitsu employees commented on the dysfunctional culture at the company. Apparently, Fujitsu is extremely reluctant to hire full-time high-quality software technicians for short-term projects. Instead, it relies on low-paid operatives in outsourced companies with the inevitable erratic and inconsistent results.
The BBC cites Satoshi Nakajima who worked at NTT (Japan’s premier telecommunications company) before becoming a foundational member of Microsoft. Satoshi characterises Fujitsu as a zombie company staggering on thanks to its close relationship with the government. The cozy relationship ensures its continual profitability despite the ossified company culture and inadequate tech capabilities."
Loving Trump's attorney in the immunity hearing, arguing that the President could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, and if not impeached, could not be prosecuted criminally.* Actually, that was a hypothetical put to him, but it didn't sway his argument at all.
Biden might be giving that one consideration, if it flies ? He'd be impeached - but it would solve the 'should I run again ?' and 'what about Donald' problems at a stroke.
*And also, if he were impeached, could not be criminally tried, as that would constitute double jeopardy...
If that is even remotely true, that would be hilarious
Ps I did try to link to the NYT piece to not raise your blood pressure but I couldn’t get the link and the Atlantic Constitution doesn’t allow access in Europe).
You're slow - I posted that last night.
I have no doubt. Trump’s legal trials are becoming a full time job for you..:)
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
Time to roll out my colleague's story about his wife. On a crowded train with their 3-yr old. 3-yr old looks over to black guy sitting opposite and says "you're a monkey". Complete guy coming through the saloon swinging doors piano player stops playing silence. And my colleague's wife looks at her son and says, without missing a beat - "no, you're a monkey".
Carriage resumes normal activity.
When my son was around 4 or 5 he'd learnt a new rhyme from somewhere that he used to chant regularly on the bus whenever he saw a bald chap. Most embarrassing. The rhyme was: Hey you, over there What's it like to have no hair?
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
Time to roll out my colleague's story about his wife. On a crowded train with their 3-yr old. 3-yr old looks over to black guy sitting opposite and says "you're a monkey". Complete guy coming through the saloon swinging doors piano player stops playing silence. And my colleague's wife looks at her son and says, without missing a beat - "no, you're a monkey".
I remember children being called monkeys all the time at primary school, but since everyone was white it probably wasn't a problem.
I grew up in the outskirts of Birmingham. In the 1970s we only had less than half a dozen Afro-Carribean heritage boys at school back then. I bet you can't guess which less than half a dozen boys were referred to as "monkeys" on a regular basis.
IF you had matriculated in USA, and called a Black kid a "monkey" you'd have been consuming breakfast, lunch and dinner through a straw for some time.
For context, knew a Black guy who told me this story: when he was in high school, a "humorist" asked him, "Hey, where's your spear?"
Answer - "Up you Mama's rear!" That shitfaced clown got off easy, because my friend was a really nice person.
This is black British TV presenter Reggie Yates calling a white South African child a "little monkey". Just after 46:35.
My wife tells a story of when she was in Tennessee in the 80's, travelling with her WASP friend and daughter. The daughter saw a young black girl and pointed her out, saying
Both Trump and Biden remain too long, Biden especially.
Haley is polling well in NH but Trump has commanding leads nationwide and she can't beat him unless she goes for him directly, which she isn't doing. So given that Trump won't withdraw, even if in prison then unless he's barred somehow, she doesn't get the nomination.
I simply don't see Biden retiring either. Leave aside that he really wants the job and has done all his life. The mechanics are tough. The primaries are already underway. Filing deadlines have passed and are passing. If Biden withdraws, there's every chance that random wierdos end up with a load of delegates because they're the only ones left - and Biden still gets a majority because he's on the ballot anyway and there's no-one else credible to vote for, and so can more-or-less dictate his successor (but who? Not Harris, surely?). We're already close to being too late for a proper Democrat primary campaign.
Yep.
Could be convention that decides the nominee if Biden has to pull in Spring because of health.
That could well be popcorntastic.
It would be Harris as incumbent but we all know that’s going to be a disaster.
Not sure how the Democrats would escape the issue though
If Biden withdrew, they couldn't escape the issue.
But it wouldn't necessarily be Harris (who may not be incumbent; Biden could withdraw from the nomination race while remaining president - or he could quit both, voluntarily or otherwise; those are three different scenarios that need gaming out individually). Whatever, it would be Biden's delegates at the convention deciding, with or without his input. Harris might have some claim based on seniority but she's hardly been a glowing success as VP (not that it's an easy role in which to be successful).
Biden won't quit as President unless he has a very major and acute health issue. But there must be a >30% chance he will decide not to run again. Then the Dem nomination field is wide open.
I simply don't get that thinking. Why would there be a 1-in-3 chance that Biden decides not to run again, given that he literally is running again? If there was a time to step back, it was about 3-4 months ago. That would have given potential successors time to arrange primary campaigns and the public the chance to choose someone.
One of the golden rules of political betting is Understand the Process (alongside understand the people, precedent, public and political culture).
In this case, many filing deadlines for the primary are long passed. Arkansas, for example, closed in November; California closed in December. If you're not on the ballot, you won't be getting any delegates. It's all very well saying that the field would be wide open if Biden withdrew - yes, in a sense it would - but if he withdrew now it would render the primaries all-but redundant. Biden has decided to run again; this is not an open question any more.
Absolutely. The breathless “what-iffery” regarding Biden’s candidacy makes little sense now. He is running and the deadlines have passed. Absent a severe health crisis which forces him to withdraw, or death, he is running. The process has started. It’s done.
I don’t think that’s right. Yes, deadlines have passed but Biden could still withdraw pre-/ at the Convention and so a new candidate would have to be found. The simple fact is that, if Biden is still polling badly vs Trump come next May / June, the apparatus will swing into motion and there will be plenty of reasons given why an ‘extraordinary’ set of circumstances mean the rules have to be circumvented.
What apparatus?
The Democratic Party does not want to risk Trump winning, which is exactly what it looks like now and there is no reason to suggest why that may change.
You may want to ask yourself why Obama spends so much time in Washington DC when the convention amongst US Presidents is that they leave DC when they retire.
The Democratic Party is not going to risk Trump getting back in.
What is this 'Democratic Party' of which you speak? If Biden has close to 100% of the delegates at the convention - his delegates, pledged to him and in many cases bound by party rules or even law to vote for him - how exactly are these shadowy party leaders going to replace him?
There is no Democratic Party independent of the senior Democrat figures themselves. And it can't "not risk" Trump getting back in. That's down to the public. If they wanted a different candidate, they need a time machine (or a serious health issue) now.
Read what many in the Democratic Party are suggesting namely Biden needs to step down and don’t seem too fussed about what the rules are. They are easy to find - just go on The Hill, The Messenger, Politico or the likes of Salon or Vox for something more left wing. Now they may be wrong and you are right but they do not seem too bothered about the rules argument.
The general view is that, if it is going to happen, it will happen at the Convention where the various candidates will jockey for Biden’s pledges and a candidate will be selected
They can suggest what they like. I'm sure there are Tory activists who'd like Sunak to stand down. Doesn't mean they can do anything about it.
There seems to be a misconception here of what the Convention is. It's not a gathering of the Democrats' great and good (though they will be there); it's as much a stage-managed electoral college as, well, the Electoral College. And Biden will have pretty much every elected delegate pledged to him. It will not be a contest; it will be a coronation. Biden will have been accepted as the Democratic candidate long before July, by media, public and party colleagues alike.
'Not being fussed about the rules' is flying in the face of Johnson's Iron Law of Politics.
But...
If, say, Biden decided in June that he could not stand (a new health issue maybe), he would presumably announce that, and all those delegate pledged to him would do what exactly?
If, say, Biden had a heart attack in June - enough to cause him to withdraw from running again but not to stand down as president, as he could still do the job for the time being - then he would have a choice between recommending an alternative to his delegates, or freeing them up to vote as they saw fit - or some combination of the two. Presumably there'd have to be some arrangement whereby potential candidates could lobby, campaign and so on.
That said, I'd still expect the first ballot to go ahead on the primary count, not least to satisfy states where rules bind delegates to candidates. Biden would then decline the nomination and free up delegates.
But that's far from a "30%+" chance.
I’ve said before I have got some of the Dem Governors on at 100/1 to 200/1 for such an eventuality - I’m not treating Biden dropping out as a probability (and I don’t think I mentioned 30%+) but, at those odds, I’m more than happy to have a bet.
You didn't, but BenPointer did, in the fifth tweet in the thread.
FWIW, triple-digit odds for the likes of Newsom seems fair enough as cover. Indeed, if Harris gets dropped as VP (not likely but possible) then you have two routes to the presidency open up.
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
"Is that "m" for multiculturalism?"
"Is that "m" for Multicultural Megan Markle?" - Shirley?
An employee at our firm has asked to be paid in Crypto and final decision has been referred to me!
My advice is to seal every computer and piece of paper touched by this enquiry in a safe, weld it up, and drop it to the bottom of the Marianas Trench. Then run away to Singapore on a tramp steamer under an assumed name.
I wonder where Camila Batmanghelidjh sat with respect to the NU10K? Influential third sector director, extensive links with other parts of the political, charity and media establishment, sounds like she's a member. Yet her fall from grace was absolute - even though ultimately unjustified. I thought NU10Kers only failed upwards? I thought they all protected each other - yet it seems like the absolute opposite in her case.
NU10K is an right-wing invention, no such thing exists.
There are influential people, some of whom would obviously be among the 10,000 most influential in the UK, but once you get beyond the obvious, you soon get into argument.
Here's a (fairly) random list of a dozen influential people - are they amongst the top 10k influencers? Are they in the 'so-called' NU10K?
Alan Bates David Cameron King Charles Suella Braverman Gary Lineker Paul Dacre Sue Gray Frederick Barclay Carol Vorderman Rishi Sunak Richard Tice Rachel Reeves
Here's an example. There once was a leading economist who was sent to prison in disgrace for lying about a speeding offence. After her time was served he friends in the media did all they could to rehabilitate her - evert time the BBC needed an economist, you've guessed it, dear old ex-con Vicki Pryce (for it is she) would be wheeled out.
If this was a real conspiracy surely she'd have avoided jail altogether. She's done her time, she's good at her job, I don't see why she shouldn't work tbh.
I think her rehabilitation was a bit easier than others, shall we say. Take Danny Baker - a career ended because he made an off the cuff joke that some 'chose' to call racist.
Danny Baker likened Harry & Meghan's child to a chimpanzee. If that's not racist, what is?
What's the context?
I call my children monkeys all the time. Especially my youngest, that's my nickname for her, "monkey" and if I'm out and about and want her to eg hold my hand before we cross the road I'll say something like "come on, monkey". The fact she's always jumping around and climbing onto the back of the sofa may or may not be related to the inspiration of the nickname.
Wouldn't very often say it about other peoples kids though. But I have called other people's kids "cheeky monkeys" before.
According to wiki:
Baker posted an image on Twitter of a couple holding hands with a chimpanzee dressed in clothes. He had added the caption: "Royal Baby leaves hospital," referring to the recent birth of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, son of Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.
Baker claimed - and I believe him - that he had no idea Meghan Markle is mixed race (he thought she was white) so the remark was entirely innocent, and devoid of any racial intent
Bless
My wife also assumed that Markle was white. Its not that difficult to believe.
Hmm, I find that bit harder to believe.
That he wasn't thinking about the race is easier to believe.
Racists make racist remarks as they're thinking about race and mean it. Non-racists don't think about race all the time, so forgetting/not thinking about it can be entirely natural for a non-racist and we should ideally all be like that.
Really? My wife once thought a mixed race friend simply had a good tan (for years, until I told her). She does not follow gossip magazines and stupid reality stuff, can't stand the royal family and had only seen her in films. She looks white to me too.
Should have gone to Specsavers.
'White' is a matter of opinion. There's precious little practical difference in skin colour between natives of Greece or southern Spain, and northern Africa. But one is typically classed as white and the other as Arab (ie brown).
I have always found Meghan Markle to be a stunningly beautiful woman. I was aware from the offset that she was of mixed heritage. That said who cares about her racial heritage? Well perhaps the print media. "Gorgeous Kate Middleton selects Lillies of the valley for her wedding bouquet. Evil Meghan Markle puts Princess Charlotte's life in peril for a wedding bouquet of toxic Lillies of the valley". Similarly avocados etc, etc.
I have no doubt Danny Baker is not a racist. Now Danny Baker fronted a football show. He is of my age so should be well aware of the toxicity of disgusting monkey analogies, for example bananas directed at John Barnes, outrageous racism to John and Justin Fashanu. West Brom's trio and Viv Anderson. I would avoid monkey analogies irrespective of the race of the recipient. At best Baker was very clumsy.
Baker is a Millwall fan of many years standing, so the likelihood of him never having heard racist chanting is low.
That said, I agree that it's unlikely he's racist. As others have said, if he were, and been idiotic enough to post what he did *because* he intended it to be a racist jab (and expect not to be punished for it), then he'd have done other things along the same lines. Indeed, he couldn't have got through his Saturday shows - which relied greatly on linking ideas and themes, all live - without slipping up somewhere.
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
"Is that "m" for multiculturalism?"
"Is that "m" for Multicultural Megan Markle?" - Shirley?
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
Time to roll out my colleague's story about his wife. On a crowded train with their 3-yr old. 3-yr old looks over to black guy sitting opposite and says "you're a monkey". Complete guy coming through the saloon swinging doors piano player stops playing silence. And my colleague's wife looks at her son and says, without missing a beat - "no, you're a monkey".
Carriage resumes normal activity.
My mixed-race niece (who’s very dark skinned and calls herself black), who for the purposes of this story I’ll call Jo, is a social worker. A few weeks before Xmas she and a colleague - a white guy I’ll call Andy - paid a visit to a (white) foster mother. Jo had never met this woman before.
So Jo and Andy turn up at the house, get sat down and get offered drinks by the foster mother.
Jo - I’ll have coffee, black, no sugar please. Andy - milky tea, two sugars please.
Making sure she’s got the order straight in her head the woman says ‘So, you’re (pointing at Jo) black, and you’re (turning to point at Andy) white.’ Poor woman pauses for a beat, realises what she’s done, and dashes off into the kitchen.
Jo thought it was hilarious. She told me the story of Xmas Eve and tears were running down her cheeks. Being a professional she didn’t comment on it at all, totally ignored it. But she imagined the poor woman stood in the kitchen, cheeks flushed with embarrassment, going ‘fuck, fuck, fuck’! Jo can’t wait to get to know the woman a bit better so they can laugh about it.
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
Time to roll out my colleague's story about his wife. On a crowded train with their 3-yr old. 3-yr old looks over to black guy sitting opposite and says "you're a monkey". Complete guy coming through the saloon swinging doors piano player stops playing silence. And my colleague's wife looks at her son and says, without missing a beat - "no, you're a monkey".
Carriage resumes normal activity.
My mixed-race niece (who’s very dark skinned and calls herself black), who for the purposes of this story I’ll call Jo, is a social worker. A few weeks before Xmas she and a colleague - a white guy I’ll call Andy - paid a visit to a (white) foster mother. Jo had never met this woman before.
So Jo and Andy turn up at the house, get sat down and get offered drinks by the foster mother.
Jo - I’ll have coffee, black, no sugar please. Andy - milky tea, two sugars please.
Making sure she’s got the order straight in her head the woman says ‘So, you’re (pointing at Jo) black, and you’re (turning to point at Andy) white.’ Poor woman pauses for a beat, realises what she’s done, and dashes off into the kitchen.
Jo thought it was hilarious. She told me the story of Xmas Eve and tears were running down her cheeks. Being a professional she didn’t comment on it at all, totally ignored it. But she imagined the poor woman stood in the kitchen, cheeks flushed with embarrassment, going ‘fuck, fuck, fuck’! Jo can’t wait to get to know the woman a bit better so they can laugh about it.
I don't think Trump expects a positive outcome, legally, on this one. It's a matter of delaying trials as far as possible, and a performative piece for fundraising.
And I suspect everyone in the courtroom knows that. Hence, it's actually fairly low stakes for Trump's lawyers. Make the legal arguments such as they are, stick to their guns, ride out the inevitable scepticism (delivered with a twinkle in the presiding judges' eyes), pick up the pay cheque.
I went to A & E at midnight with chest pains and again had a lot of tests and bloods taken
The doctor and consultant reaffirmed my need for my pacemaker operation on the 6th February, but it was in order for me to go home and rest and avoid coffee but if further issues arose to again present at A & E
I was attended to relatively quickly but the wait time for most was 17 hours
One of the nurses said they had patients in A & E for over 48 hours.
All the staff were and are exceptional, but overwhelmed, and I have no idea how this crisis across all administrations is resolved
As it so happens, and if I wasn't struggling enough, Trump appears on Sky hitting out right left and centre and to be honest a shiver went through me as I just felt he is going to win this - why is this even possible
Inspired by the weekend's parallel thread I've decided to starve myself for a bit. 24 hours from Sunday night until yesterday evening and now aiming for 36 hours from yesterday evening to tomorrow morning.
I don't yet feel supernaturally focused on the delicious gazelle in the distance. Or light headed and weak. Just rather hungry.
I went to A & E at midnight with chest pains and again had a lot of tests and bloods taken
The doctor and consultant reaffirmed my need for my pacemaker operation on the 6th February, but it was in order for me to go home and rest and avoid coffee but if further issues arose to again present at A & E
I was attended to relatively quickly but the wait time for most was 17 hours
One of the nurses said they had patients in A & E for over 48 hours.
All the staff were and are exceptional, but overwhelmed, and I have no idea how this crisis across all administrations is resolved
As it so happens, and if I wasn't struggling enough, Trump appears on Sky hitting out right left and centre and to be honest a shiver went through me as I just felt he is going to win this - why is this even possible
All the best, Big G. Feb 6 isn't far off and will hopefully make a big difference.
An employee at our firm has asked to be paid in Crypto and final decision has been referred to me!
Do HMRC accept bitcoin?
This is what the FD has flagged up on. The answer is complicated.
Another issue is if the price of that Crypto goes up is it a capital gain and have we unwillingly partaken in tax evasion?
Can’t they just buy bitcoin each time they get paid? They are just transferring the risk associated with the price volatility onto the company.
That’s what I am wondering.
+1 It’s up to them to do it - otherwise you will have a world of fun were the value of the Crypto to move.
Best example when it comes to HMRC is to talk about how they handle VAT paid in Euros. They will work on the exchange rate of the day the invoice was sent not the day the company gets paid it’s you that takes the risk there .
Equally look at how HMRC treat payment using Gold and similar
Loving Trump's attorney in the immunity hearing, arguing that the President could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, and if not impeached, could not be prosecuted criminally.* Actually, that was a hypothetical put to him, but it didn't sway his argument at all.
Biden might be giving that one consideration, if it flies ? He'd be impeached - but it would solve the 'should I run again ?' and 'what about Donald' problems at a stroke.
*And also, if he were impeached, could not be criminally tried, as that would constitute double jeopardy...
If that is even remotely true, that would be hilarious
Ps I did try to link to the NYT piece to not raise your blood pressure but I couldn’t get the link and the Atlantic Constitution doesn’t allow access in Europe).
You're slow - I posted that last night.
I have no doubt. Trump’s legal trials are becoming a full time job for you..:)
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
Time to roll out my colleague's story about his wife. On a crowded train with their 3-yr old. 3-yr old looks over to black guy sitting opposite and says "you're a monkey". Complete guy coming through the saloon swinging doors piano player stops playing silence. And my colleague's wife looks at her son and says, without missing a beat - "no, you're a monkey".
Carriage resumes normal activity.
My mixed-race niece (who’s very dark skinned and calls herself black), who for the purposes of this story I’ll call Jo, is a social worker. A few weeks before Xmas she and a colleague - a white guy I’ll call Andy - paid a visit to a (white) foster mother. Jo had never met this woman before.
So Jo and Andy turn up at the house, get sat down and get offered drinks by the foster mother.
Jo - I’ll have coffee, black, no sugar please. Andy - milky tea, two sugars please.
Making sure she’s got the order straight in her head the woman says ‘So, you’re (pointing at Jo) black, and you’re (turning to point at Andy) white.’ Poor woman pauses for a beat, realises what she’s done, and dashes off into the kitchen.
Jo thought it was hilarious. She told me the story of Xmas Eve and tears were running down her cheeks. Being a professional she didn’t comment on it at all, totally ignored it. But she imagined the poor woman stood in the kitchen, cheeks flushed with embarrassment, going ‘fuck, fuck, fuck’! Jo can’t wait to get to know the woman a bit better so they can laugh about it.
You think she was embarrased.
I was refereeing a Sunday morning soccer game. One team was playing in red and all the players were white. The other team was in blue and all the players were black. As was my normal practice I would indicate the direction of a free-kick or throw in by calling out 'red ball' or 'blue ball' as appropriate. All was fine and perfectly normal until there was a tussle for the ball under my nose involving a minor infringement. I blew up sharply, indicated the direction of play and announced 'black ball'.
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
I don't think Trump expects a positive outcome, legally, on this one. It's a matter of delaying trials as far as possible, and a performative piece for fundraising.
And I suspect everyone in the courtroom knows that. Hence, it's actually fairly low stakes for Trump's lawyers. Make the legal arguments such as they are, stick to their guns, ride out the inevitable scepticism (delivered with a twinkle in the presiding judges' eyes), pick up the pay cheque.
Yebbut - there was very little for the Supreme Court to run with if they don't want to look ridiculously partisan.
On 'monkey', here's a true story. When I was a young teacher in London, I had a new class of 17-year olds, nearly all of Afro-Caribbean origin. I had to register their names, and asked one lad to spell his out. At one point I couldn't hear whether he said 'n' or 'm', so I asked him: "Is that 'm' for monkey?". After an audible gasp of shock from the whole class, you could have heard a pin drop, and the lad himself was a mixture of furious and embarrassed. The whole group were convinced that I was some white racist deliberately using a racist epithet to humiliate the lad. I realised what I'd done, in all innocence, and grovelled appropriately. In the end I won him, and the group, over, but it was hard work.
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
Time to roll out my colleague's story about his wife. On a crowded train with their 3-yr old. 3-yr old looks over to black guy sitting opposite and says "you're a monkey". Complete guy coming through the saloon swinging doors piano player stops playing silence. And my colleague's wife looks at her son and says, without missing a beat - "no, you're a monkey".
Carriage resumes normal activity.
My mixed-race niece (who’s very dark skinned and calls herself black), who for the purposes of this story I’ll call Jo, is a social worker. A few weeks before Xmas she and a colleague - a white guy I’ll call Andy - paid a visit to a (white) foster mother. Jo had never met this woman before.
So Jo and Andy turn up at the house, get sat down and get offered drinks by the foster mother.
Jo - I’ll have coffee, black, no sugar please. Andy - milky tea, two sugars please.
Making sure she’s got the order straight in her head the woman says ‘So, you’re (pointing at Jo) black, and you’re (turning to point at Andy) white.’ Poor woman pauses for a beat, realises what she’s done, and dashes off into the kitchen.
Jo thought it was hilarious. She told me the story of Xmas Eve and tears were running down her cheeks. Being a professional she didn’t comment on it at all, totally ignored it. But she imagined the poor woman stood in the kitchen, cheeks flushed with embarrassment, going ‘fuck, fuck, fuck’! Jo can’t wait to get to know the woman a bit better so they can laugh about it.
Although not racially charged my favourite and true experience of words being used that have double meaning leading to amusing consequences was sitting in a Chinese restaurant in Luxembourg with a colleague/friend from Helsinki. The manageress came over and said in broken English “you finish?” .
My friend was astonished and looked at her and asked “how can you tell?”. Much laughter ensued when I explained to both parties.
Both Trump and Biden remain too long, Biden especially.
Haley is polling well in NH but Trump has commanding leads nationwide and she can't beat him unless she goes for him directly, which she isn't doing. So given that Trump won't withdraw, even if in prison then unless he's barred somehow, she doesn't get the nomination.
I simply don't see Biden retiring either. Leave aside that he really wants the job and has done all his life. The mechanics are tough. The primaries are already underway. Filing deadlines have passed and are passing. If Biden withdraws, there's every chance that random wierdos end up with a load of delegates because they're the only ones left - and Biden still gets a majority because he's on the ballot anyway and there's no-one else credible to vote for, and so can more-or-less dictate his successor (but who? Not Harris, surely?). We're already close to being too late for a proper Democrat primary campaign.
Yep.
Could be convention that decides the nominee if Biden has to pull in Spring because of health.
That could well be popcorntastic.
It would be Harris as incumbent but we all know that’s going to be a disaster.
Not sure how the Democrats would escape the issue though
If Biden withdrew, they couldn't escape the issue.
But it wouldn't necessarily be Harris (who may not be incumbent; Biden could withdraw from the nomination race while remaining president - or he could quit both, voluntarily or otherwise; those are three different scenarios that need gaming out individually). Whatever, it would be Biden's delegates at the convention deciding, with or without his input. Harris might have some claim based on seniority but she's hardly been a glowing success as VP (not that it's an easy role in which to be successful).
Biden won't quit as President unless he has a very major and acute health issue. But there must be a >30% chance he will decide not to run again. Then the Dem nomination field is wide open.
I simply don't get that thinking. Why would there be a 1-in-3 chance that Biden decides not to run again, given that he literally is running again? If there was a time to step back, it was about 3-4 months ago. That would have given potential successors time to arrange primary campaigns and the public the chance to choose someone.
One of the golden rules of political betting is Understand the Process (alongside understand the people, precedent, public and political culture).
In this case, many filing deadlines for the primary are long passed. Arkansas, for example, closed in November; California closed in December. If you're not on the ballot, you won't be getting any delegates. It's all very well saying that the field would be wide open if Biden withdrew - yes, in a sense it would - but if he withdrew now it would render the primaries all-but redundant. Biden has decided to run again; this is not an open question any more.
Absolutely. The breathless “what-iffery” regarding Biden’s candidacy makes little sense now. He is running and the deadlines have passed. Absent a severe health crisis which forces him to withdraw, or death, he is running. The process has started. It’s done.
I don’t think that’s right. Yes, deadlines have passed but Biden could still withdraw pre-/ at the Convention and so a new candidate would have to be found. The simple fact is that, if Biden is still polling badly vs Trump come next May / June, the apparatus will swing into motion and there will be plenty of reasons given why an ‘extraordinary’ set of circumstances mean the rules have to be circumvented.
What apparatus?
The Democratic Party does not want to risk Trump winning, which is exactly what it looks like now and there is no reason to suggest why that may change.
You may want to ask yourself why Obama spends so much time in Washington DC when the convention amongst US Presidents is that they leave DC when they retire.
The Democratic Party is not going to risk Trump getting back in.
What is this 'Democratic Party' of which you speak? If Biden has close to 100% of the delegates at the convention - his delegates, pledged to him and in many cases bound by party rules or even law to vote for him - how exactly are these shadowy party leaders going to replace him?
There is no Democratic Party independent of the senior Democrat figures themselves. And it can't "not risk" Trump getting back in. That's down to the public. If they wanted a different candidate, they need a time machine (or a serious health issue) now.
Read what many in the Democratic Party are suggesting namely Biden needs to step down and don’t seem too fussed about what the rules are. They are easy to find - just go on The Hill, The Messenger, Politico or the likes of Salon or Vox for something more left wing. Now they may be wrong and you are right but they do not seem too bothered about the rules argument.
The general view is that, if it is going to happen, it will happen at the Convention where the various candidates will jockey for Biden’s pledges and a candidate will be selected
They can suggest what they like. I'm sure there are Tory activists who'd like Sunak to stand down. Doesn't mean they can do anything about it.
There seems to be a misconception here of what the Convention is. It's not a gathering of the Democrats' great and good (though they will be there); it's as much a stage-managed electoral college as, well, the Electoral College. And Biden will have pretty much every elected delegate pledged to him. It will not be a contest; it will be a coronation. Biden will have been accepted as the Democratic candidate long before July, by media, public and party colleagues alike.
'Not being fussed about the rules' is flying in the face of Johnson's Iron Law of Politics.
But...
If, say, Biden decided in June that he could not stand (a new health issue maybe), he would presumably announce that, and all those delegate pledged to him would do what exactly?
If, say, Biden had a heart attack in June - enough to cause him to withdraw from running again but not to stand down as president, as he could still do the job for the time being - then he would have a choice between recommending an alternative to his delegates, or freeing them up to vote as they saw fit - or some combination of the two. Presumably there'd have to be some arrangement whereby potential candidates could lobby, campaign and so on.
That said, I'd still expect the first ballot to go ahead on the primary count, not least to satisfy states where rules bind delegates to candidates. Biden would then decline the nomination and free up delegates.
But that's far from a "30%+" chance.
I’ve said before I have got some of the Dem Governors on at 100/1 to 200/1 for such an eventuality - I’m not treating Biden dropping out as a probability (and I don’t think I mentioned 30%+) but, at those odds, I’m more than happy to have a bet.
You didn't, but BenPointer did, in the fifth tweet in the thread.
FWIW, triple-digit odds for the likes of Newsom seems fair enough as cover. Indeed, if Harris gets dropped as VP (not likely but possible) then you have two routes to the presidency open up.
Fwiw the betting is about in line with a 30% chance of Biden pulling out.
But question for you. I know you think Trump has the GOP nomination locked up but let's assume he somehow crashes and they pick Haley or some other non-threat to democracy instead.
In that case do you think Biden is more likely to pull out? ie do you think the prospect of Trump getting back is to any extent a factor in Biden going for a 2nd term?
Seattle Times ($) - When Alaska flight 1282 blew open, a mom went into ‘go mode’ to protect her son By Dominic Gates Seattle Times aerospace reporter
When the Boeing 737 MAX 9’s side blew out explosively on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 Friday evening, a 15-year-old high school student was in the window seat in the row directly ahead, his shoulder beside the edge of the gaping hole.
His mother, who was seated beside him, in the middle seat of row 25, described the moment as a very loud bang, like “a bomb exploding.”
As the air in the passenger cabin rushed out, the Oregon woman [Faye] turned and saw her son’s seat twisting backward toward the hole, his seat headrest ripped off and sucked into the void, her son’s arms jerked upward.
“He and his seat were pulled back and towards the exterior of the plane in the direction of the hole,” she said. “I reached over and grabbed his body and pulled him towards me over the armrest.” . . .
“I was probably as filled with adrenaline as I’ve ever been in my life,” Faye said.
“I had my arms underneath his arm, kind of hooked under his shoulders and wrapped around his back,” she continued. “I did not realize until after the flight that his clothing had been torn off of his upper body.” . . .
A photo taken after the plane landed shows the boy’s seat pulled back, though by then it had returned partially to its position. At the moment of the incident, Faye’s face was pressed against the rear of her son’s right shoulder and she said the seat “was pulled back to such a degree that I was looking directly out of the hole into the night sky.”
The plane’s oxygen masks had dropped from the ceiling in front of the passengers. The woman in the aisle seat of row 25, a stranger to Faye and her son, put on her own mask, then reached across Faye and put the mask on the son.
With difficulty, she turned Faye’s head and managed to get a mask on her too. Then she grabbed onto Faye as she in turn kept a tight grip on her son.
“We were both holding on to my son,” Faye said. “I was just holding him and saying repeatedly, ‘It’s OK. It’s OK. It’s OK, buddy. It’s OK. It’s OK.’ “
The boy had been wearing a T-shirt and a V-neck pullover windbreaker. Both were ripped off his body. . . .
As the outrush of air subsided, Faye was gripped with a fear that another panel might pop out in their row. There was no such panel, but she didn’t know that. . .
With the noise of the air outside and with masks on, the seatmate couldn’t hear her.
At that point, “things had stopped flying out. I could see that his bag was on the floor,” Faye said. “I realized the pressure is now no longer such that we are risking getting pulled out by getting out of our seats.” . . .
Until then, Faye had seen no flight attendant. As they unbuckled, she reached up and pushed the call button.
A flight attendant came to their row. “I saw the shock on her face,” Faye said. “I remember thinking she didn’t know there was a hole in this plane” until that moment. . .
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
The question of where the buck stops becomes increasingly sharp.
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
I suspect Davey will go soon enough as a sacrificial offering. As for Sir Keir, the Tory posters write themselves: 'If he didn't intervene to prevent the Post Office scandals, he sure as hell won't intervene to stop the boats. Keir Starmer: currying favour to those on the wrong side of justice.'
Loving Trump's attorney in the immunity hearing, arguing that the President could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, and if not impeached, could not be prosecuted criminally.* Actually, that was a hypothetical put to him, but it didn't sway his argument at all.
Biden might be giving that one consideration, if it flies ? He'd be impeached - but it would solve the 'should I run again ?' and 'what about Donald' problems at a stroke.
*And also, if he were impeached, could not be criminally tried, as that would constitute double jeopardy...
The US constitution explicitly allows for subsequent prosecution - Article I, Section 3, clause 7:
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
I wasn't imagining it, reading this account. https://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote/2aj1d2bGqyhduSmYaLIxE02f9CM ..The court also brought up several times the hypotheticals the DoJ outlined in their briefs - what if a president orders the murder of a political rival? What if a president sells pardons? What if a president accepts bribes? After a lot of back and forth with Trump's lawyers refusing to answer the question, he finally admitted that a president could do all those things and be immune from criminal prosecution unless he was impeached and convicted for the same actions...
Trump's attorney's argument is literally that unless impeached, and found guilty by the Senate, he cannot subsequently be prosecuted for any act while President.
That, of course, is despite Trump's own lawyers arguing, during his impeachment, that if he were not convicted, he could still be criminally prosecuted after he left office.
I went to A & E at midnight with chest pains and again had a lot of tests and bloods taken
The doctor and consultant reaffirmed my need for my pacemaker operation on the 6th February, but it was in order for me to go home and rest and avoid coffee but if further issues arose to again present at A & E
I was attended to relatively quickly but the wait time for most was 17 hours
One of the nurses said they had patients in A & E for over 48 hours.
All the staff were and are exceptional, but overwhelmed, and I have no idea how this crisis across all administrations is resolved
As it so happens, and if I wasn't struggling enough, Trump appears on Sky hitting out right left and centre and to be honest a shiver went through me as I just felt he is going to win this - why is this even possible
All the best with that BigG. And no that's the last thing you want when you're feeling fragile, coming across Donald Trump on the tv. Yuckety yuck, fuckety fuck.
Loving Trump's attorney in the immunity hearing, arguing that the President could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, and if not impeached, could not be prosecuted criminally.* Actually, that was a hypothetical put to him, but it didn't sway his argument at all.
Biden might be giving that one consideration, if it flies ? He'd be impeached - but it would solve the 'should I run again ?' and 'what about Donald' problems at a stroke.
*And also, if he were impeached, could not be criminally tried, as that would constitute double jeopardy...
The US constitution explicitly allows for subsequent prosecution - Article I, Section 3, clause 7:
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
I wasn't imagining it, reading this account. https://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote/2aj1d2bGqyhduSmYaLIxE02f9CM ..The court also brought up several times the hypotheticals the DoJ outlined in their briefs - what if a president orders the murder of a political rival? What if a president sells pardons? What if a president accepts bribes? After a lot of back and forth with Trump's lawyers refusing to answer the question, he finally admitted that a president could do all those things and be immune from criminal prosecution unless he was impeached and convicted for the same actions...
Trump's attorney's argument is literally that unless impeached, and found guilty by the Senate, he cannot subsequently be prosecuted for any act while President.
That, of course, is despite Trump's own lawyers arguing, during his impeachment, that if he were not convicted, he could still be criminally prosecuted after he left office.
That surely is permission for Mr Biden to have Mr Trump killed.
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
The question of where the buck stops becomes increasingly sharp.
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
Davey's case would be stronger still, if he continues to make it after resigning on the principle of ministerial responsibility. Though I admit that went out of fashion with Lord Carrington.
As far as where the buck stops, it ought to do so in multiple locations. This is not the responsibility of one, of even of a few individuals (and Davey bears less responsibility than most).
I went to A & E at midnight with chest pains and again had a lot of tests and bloods taken
The doctor and consultant reaffirmed my need for my pacemaker operation on the 6th February, but it was in order for me to go home and rest and avoid coffee but if further issues arose to again present at A & E
I was attended to relatively quickly but the wait time for most was 17 hours
One of the nurses said they had patients in A & E for over 48 hours.
All the staff were and are exceptional, but overwhelmed, and I have no idea how this crisis across all administrations is resolved
As it so happens, and if I wasn't struggling enough, Trump appears on Sky hitting out right left and centre and to be honest a shiver went through me as I just felt he is going to win this - why is this even possible
Sorry you had to do test run of your local A&E. Good news is that you/they are on top of your situation.
As for The Donald, well, this too will pass.
Personally recommend quasi-zen semi-meditation as effective way to ease strain on heart, mind AND bowels.
PLUS in your case you can look forward to Valentines by the boxcar (or lifeboat?) on 14 Feb!
I don't think Trump expects a positive outcome, legally, on this one. It's a matter of delaying trials as far as possible, and a performative piece for fundraising.
And I suspect everyone in the courtroom knows that. Hence, it's actually fairly low stakes for Trump's lawyers. Make the legal arguments such as they are, stick to their guns, ride out the inevitable scepticism (delivered with a twinkle in the presiding judges' eyes), pick up the pay cheque.
Yebbut - there was very little for the Supreme Court to run with if they don't want to look ridiculously partisan.
Which some think isn't an issue. But I do.
The Supreme Court won't find for Trump on this particular one anyway, in my view, even with a 6-3 conservative majority on the court. Thomas is essentially bought and paid for, but I suspect even Alito will struggle to get on board. I don't think Roberts will go with it for one second, and would be surprised if the three Trump appointees do either.
Given the furore over his appointment (which was justifiable to a fair degree) Democrats won't admit it... but Kavanaugh in particular is a conservative but pretty non-partisan jurist, and neither Gorsuch nor Coney-Barrett are in Trump's pocket. People forget that he gave to those three, but their names emerged from the GOP establishment, and they know he cannot taketh away - they are conservative judges, not Trump's golf club buddies.
14th Amendment is another matter. That's genuinely arguable and it'd be a big call to say Trump is ineligible.
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
I suspect Davey will go soon enough as a sacrificial offering. As for Sir Keir, the Tory posters write themselves: 'If he didn't intervene to prevent the Post Office scandals, he sure as hell won't intervene to stop the boats. Keir Starmer: currying favour to those on the wrong side of justice.'
Loving Trump's attorney in the immunity hearing, arguing that the President could order Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival, and if not impeached, could not be prosecuted criminally.* Actually, that was a hypothetical put to him, but it didn't sway his argument at all.
Biden might be giving that one consideration, if it flies ? He'd be impeached - but it would solve the 'should I run again ?' and 'what about Donald' problems at a stroke.
*And also, if he were impeached, could not be criminally tried, as that would constitute double jeopardy...
The US constitution explicitly allows for subsequent prosecution - Article I, Section 3, clause 7:
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
I wasn't imagining it, reading this account. https://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote/2aj1d2bGqyhduSmYaLIxE02f9CM ..The court also brought up several times the hypotheticals the DoJ outlined in their briefs - what if a president orders the murder of a political rival? What if a president sells pardons? What if a president accepts bribes? After a lot of back and forth with Trump's lawyers refusing to answer the question, he finally admitted that a president could do all those things and be immune from criminal prosecution unless he was impeached and convicted for the same actions...
Trump's attorney's argument is literally that unless impeached, and found guilty by the Senate, he cannot subsequently be prosecuted for any act while President.
That, of course, is despite Trump's own lawyers arguing, during his impeachment, that if he were not convicted, he could still be criminally prosecuted after he left office.
That surely is permission for Mr Biden to have Mr Trump killed.
Well it's certainly proof that there is no great Democratic conspiracy, otherwise he would already have done so.
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
The question of where the buck stops becomes increasingly sharp.
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
Davey's case would be stronger still, if he continues to make it after resigning on the principle of ministerial responsibility. Though I admit that went out of fashion with Lord Carrington.
As far as where the buck stops, it ought to do so in multiple locations. This is not the responsibility of one, of even of a few individuals (and Davey bears less responsibility than most).
There's little or no precedent for a politician resigning from an unconnected position over a decade after leaving the ministerial post in question.
I went to A & E at midnight with chest pains and again had a lot of tests and bloods taken
The doctor and consultant reaffirmed my need for my pacemaker operation on the 6th February, but it was in order for me to go home and rest and avoid coffee but if further issues arose to again present at A & E
I was attended to relatively quickly but the wait time for most was 17 hours
One of the nurses said they had patients in A & E for over 48 hours.
All the staff were and are exceptional, but overwhelmed, and I have no idea how this crisis across all administrations is resolved
As it so happens, and if I wasn't struggling enough, Trump appears on Sky hitting out right left and centre and to be honest a shiver went through me as I just felt he is going to win this - why is this even possible
Sorry you had to do test run of your local A&E. Good news is that you/they are on top of your situation.
As for The Donald, well, this too will pass.
Personally recommend quasi-zen semi-meditation as effective way to ease strain on heart, mind AND bowels.
PLUS in your case you can look forward to Valentines by the boxcar (or lifeboat?) on 14 Feb!
As I keep saying to all my medics they need to keep me going for my 80th on the 29th Feb, and our diamond wedding on the 16th May and of course Valentine's day
I did mention to a couple of nurses how in 1964 my wife, at the alter, promised to ' love, honour and obey' and how I have to remind her of this on occasions only for her to counter by saying she had a private word with the Good Lord and he agreed the 'obey' bit was annulled.
The nurses commented on how much they love my wife !!!!!
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
The question of where the buck stops becomes increasingly sharp.
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
Davey's case would be stronger still, if he continues to make it after resigning on the principle of ministerial responsibility. Though I admit that went out of fashion with Lord Carrington.
As far as where the buck stops, it ought to do so in multiple locations. This is not the responsibility of one, of even of a few individuals (and Davey bears less responsibility than most).
There's little or no precedent for a politician resigning from an unconnected position over a decade after leaving the ministerial post in question.
Both Trump and Biden remain too long, Biden especially.
Haley is polling well in NH but Trump has commanding leads nationwide and she can't beat him unless she goes for him directly, which she isn't doing. So given that Trump won't withdraw, even if in prison then unless he's barred somehow, she doesn't get the nomination.
I simply don't see Biden retiring either. Leave aside that he really wants the job and has done all his life. The mechanics are tough. The primaries are already underway. Filing deadlines have passed and are passing. If Biden withdraws, there's every chance that random wierdos end up with a load of delegates because they're the only ones left - and Biden still gets a majority because he's on the ballot anyway and there's no-one else credible to vote for, and so can more-or-less dictate his successor (but who? Not Harris, surely?). We're already close to being too late for a proper Democrat primary campaign.
Yep.
Could be convention that decides the nominee if Biden has to pull in Spring because of health.
That could well be popcorntastic.
It would be Harris as incumbent but we all know that’s going to be a disaster.
Not sure how the Democrats would escape the issue though
If Biden withdrew, they couldn't escape the issue.
But it wouldn't necessarily be Harris (who may not be incumbent; Biden could withdraw from the nomination race while remaining president - or he could quit both, voluntarily or otherwise; those are three different scenarios that need gaming out individually). Whatever, it would be Biden's delegates at the convention deciding, with or without his input. Harris might have some claim based on seniority but she's hardly been a glowing success as VP (not that it's an easy role in which to be successful).
Biden won't quit as President unless he has a very major and acute health issue. But there must be a >30% chance he will decide not to run again. Then the Dem nomination field is wide open.
I simply don't get that thinking. Why would there be a 1-in-3 chance that Biden decides not to run again, given that he literally is running again? If there was a time to step back, it was about 3-4 months ago. That would have given potential successors time to arrange primary campaigns and the public the chance to choose someone.
One of the golden rules of political betting is Understand the Process (alongside understand the people, precedent, public and political culture).
In this case, many filing deadlines for the primary are long passed. Arkansas, for example, closed in November; California closed in December. If you're not on the ballot, you won't be getting any delegates. It's all very well saying that the field would be wide open if Biden withdrew - yes, in a sense it would - but if he withdrew now it would render the primaries all-but redundant. Biden has decided to run again; this is not an open question any more.
Absolutely. The breathless “what-iffery” regarding Biden’s candidacy makes little sense now. He is running and the deadlines have passed. Absent a severe health crisis which forces him to withdraw, or death, he is running. The process has started. It’s done.
I don’t think that’s right. Yes, deadlines have passed but Biden could still withdraw pre-/ at the Convention and so a new candidate would have to be found. The simple fact is that, if Biden is still polling badly vs Trump come next May / June, the apparatus will swing into motion and there will be plenty of reasons given why an ‘extraordinary’ set of circumstances mean the rules have to be circumvented.
What apparatus?
The Democratic Party does not want to risk Trump winning, which is exactly what it looks like now and there is no reason to suggest why that may change.
You may want to ask yourself why Obama spends so much time in Washington DC when the convention amongst US Presidents is that they leave DC when they retire.
The Democratic Party is not going to risk Trump getting back in.
What is this 'Democratic Party' of which you speak? If Biden has close to 100% of the delegates at the convention - his delegates, pledged to him and in many cases bound by party rules or even law to vote for him - how exactly are these shadowy party leaders going to replace him?
There is no Democratic Party independent of the senior Democrat figures themselves. And it can't "not risk" Trump getting back in. That's down to the public. If they wanted a different candidate, they need a time machine (or a serious health issue) now.
Read what many in the Democratic Party are suggesting namely Biden needs to step down and don’t seem too fussed about what the rules are. They are easy to find - just go on The Hill, The Messenger, Politico or the likes of Salon or Vox for something more left wing. Now they may be wrong and you are right but they do not seem too bothered about the rules argument.
The general view is that, if it is going to happen, it will happen at the Convention where the various candidates will jockey for Biden’s pledges and a candidate will be selected
They can suggest what they like. I'm sure there are Tory activists who'd like Sunak to stand down. Doesn't mean they can do anything about it.
There seems to be a misconception here of what the Convention is. It's not a gathering of the Democrats' great and good (though they will be there); it's as much a stage-managed electoral college as, well, the Electoral College. And Biden will have pretty much every elected delegate pledged to him. It will not be a contest; it will be a coronation. Biden will have been accepted as the Democratic candidate long before July, by media, public and party colleagues alike.
'Not being fussed about the rules' is flying in the face of Johnson's Iron Law of Politics.
But...
If, say, Biden decided in June that he could not stand (a new health issue maybe), he would presumably announce that, and all those delegate pledged to him would do what exactly?
If, say, Biden had a heart attack in June - enough to cause him to withdraw from running again but not to stand down as president, as he could still do the job for the time being - then he would have a choice between recommending an alternative to his delegates, or freeing them up to vote as they saw fit - or some combination of the two. Presumably there'd have to be some arrangement whereby potential candidates could lobby, campaign and so on.
That said, I'd still expect the first ballot to go ahead on the primary count, not least to satisfy states where rules bind delegates to candidates. Biden would then decline the nomination and free up delegates.
But that's far from a "30%+" chance.
I’ve said before I have got some of the Dem Governors on at 100/1 to 200/1 for such an eventuality - I’m not treating Biden dropping out as a probability (and I don’t think I mentioned 30%+) but, at those odds, I’m more than happy to have a bet.
You didn't, but BenPointer did, in the fifth tweet in the thread.
FWIW, triple-digit odds for the likes of Newsom seems fair enough as cover. Indeed, if Harris gets dropped as VP (not likely but possible) then you have two routes to the presidency open up.
Fwiw the betting is about in line with a 30% chance of Biden pulling out.
But question for you. I know you think Trump has the GOP nomination locked up but let's assume he somehow crashes and they pick Haley or some other non-threat to democracy instead.
In that case do you think Biden is more likely to pull out? ie do you think the prospect of Trump getting back is to any extent a factor in Biden going for a 2nd term?
I think we're past that point. The main thing is that Biden wants to run. I agree that he'd be more likely to lose against Haley but I don't think that's going to weigh much with him at all. I wouldn't entirely rule it out but Trump would have to crash pretty soon - the longer it goes, the harder it becomes to voluntarily withdraw without it getting very messy.
They really should call Bond Vigilantes 'Blofelds'.
The prospect of significant pre-election tax cuts and spending promises risk the ire of the “bond vigilantes”, BlackRock has said, warning of the temptation of political parties to loosen fiscal policy this year.
Vivek Paul, UK chief investment strategist at BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, told Bloomberg that Labour and the Conservatives “may be more tempted to promise looser fiscal policy — the more this occurs, the greater the likelihood of the return of the bond vigilantes. In the lead-up to this year’s UK election, we’re watching the fiscal policy stance.”
Bond vigilantes refer to investors who can help drive up the cost of a government’s borrowing by dumping sovereign debt en masse, pushing up yields. The UK suffered at the hands of financial markets in the autumn of 2022, when yields on long-dated gilts rose to record highs on the back of Liz Truss’s promise for £50 billion in debt-funded tax cuts in the so-called mini-budget.
“The shadow of the autumn 2022 UK gilt crisis still hangs over the pre-election debate so far,” Paul wrote. The Bank of England was forced to intervene to buy up 30-year gilts to prevent fire sales of bonds by embattled pension funds to raise cash. Truss was ousted from office after 44 days.
In any decision about Biden’s future, one person will be central: Jill Biden. “The only person who could talk him out of it is his wife,” as Luntz noted on the podcast. “Nobody is looking Joe Biden straight in the eye and saying to him, ‘You’re going to lose this thing.’ It doesn’t happen in the White House. It doesn’t happen in politics. She’s the only one who could do this. And clearly, she’s not doing it.”
What is behind Huddersfield’s remarkable house price boom?
Certainly not TransPennine Express.
I don't think an 8.7% price rise constitutes a "house price boom".
It does for Huddersfield ?
Having checked as far as can be done sensibly, I don't believe the 8.7%.
The biggest data set, which is the Land Registry records of sold prices, says that prices in the Local Authority area of Kirklees, of which Huddersfield is about 35-40%, fell slightly in that period, and was coming off average price rises of 10% in the previous year. That does not sound consistent with the claim, to me.
It's possible to submit SQL queries, and I daresay there is a way of filtering by HD* postcode as it's a good setup. But I'm not going that far down the rabbit hole.
Ugh, Starmer really hates aspiration and those parents who want to do best for their kids.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
Both Trump and Biden remain too long, Biden especially.
Haley is polling well in NH but Trump has commanding leads nationwide and she can't beat him unless she goes for him directly, which she isn't doing. So given that Trump won't withdraw, even if in prison then unless he's barred somehow, she doesn't get the nomination.
I simply don't see Biden retiring either. Leave aside that he really wants the job and has done all his life. The mechanics are tough. The primaries are already underway. Filing deadlines have passed and are passing. If Biden withdraws, there's every chance that random wierdos end up with a load of delegates because they're the only ones left - and Biden still gets a majority because he's on the ballot anyway and there's no-one else credible to vote for, and so can more-or-less dictate his successor (but who? Not Harris, surely?). We're already close to being too late for a proper Democrat primary campaign.
Yep.
Could be convention that decides the nominee if Biden has to pull in Spring because of health.
That could well be popcorntastic.
It would be Harris as incumbent but we all know that’s going to be a disaster.
Not sure how the Democrats would escape the issue though
If Biden withdrew, they couldn't escape the issue.
But it wouldn't necessarily be Harris (who may not be incumbent; Biden could withdraw from the nomination race while remaining president - or he could quit both, voluntarily or otherwise; those are three different scenarios that need gaming out individually). Whatever, it would be Biden's delegates at the convention deciding, with or without his input. Harris might have some claim based on seniority but she's hardly been a glowing success as VP (not that it's an easy role in which to be successful).
Biden won't quit as President unless he has a very major and acute health issue. But there must be a >30% chance he will decide not to run again. Then the Dem nomination field is wide open.
I simply don't get that thinking. Why would there be a 1-in-3 chance that Biden decides not to run again, given that he literally is running again? If there was a time to step back, it was about 3-4 months ago. That would have given potential successors time to arrange primary campaigns and the public the chance to choose someone.
One of the golden rules of political betting is Understand the Process (alongside understand the people, precedent, public and political culture).
In this case, many filing deadlines for the primary are long passed. Arkansas, for example, closed in November; California closed in December. If you're not on the ballot, you won't be getting any delegates. It's all very well saying that the field would be wide open if Biden withdrew - yes, in a sense it would - but if he withdrew now it would render the primaries all-but redundant. Biden has decided to run again; this is not an open question any more.
Absolutely. The breathless “what-iffery” regarding Biden’s candidacy makes little sense now. He is running and the deadlines have passed. Absent a severe health crisis which forces him to withdraw, or death, he is running. The process has started. It’s done.
I don’t think that’s right. Yes, deadlines have passed but Biden could still withdraw pre-/ at the Convention and so a new candidate would have to be found. The simple fact is that, if Biden is still polling badly vs Trump come next May / June, the apparatus will swing into motion and there will be plenty of reasons given why an ‘extraordinary’ set of circumstances mean the rules have to be circumvented.
What apparatus?
The Democratic Party does not want to risk Trump winning, which is exactly what it looks like now and there is no reason to suggest why that may change.
You may want to ask yourself why Obama spends so much time in Washington DC when the convention amongst US Presidents is that they leave DC when they retire.
The Democratic Party is not going to risk Trump getting back in.
What is this 'Democratic Party' of which you speak? If Biden has close to 100% of the delegates at the convention - his delegates, pledged to him and in many cases bound by party rules or even law to vote for him - how exactly are these shadowy party leaders going to replace him?
There is no Democratic Party independent of the senior Democrat figures themselves. And it can't "not risk" Trump getting back in. That's down to the public. If they wanted a different candidate, they need a time machine (or a serious health issue) now.
Read what many in the Democratic Party are suggesting namely Biden needs to step down and don’t seem too fussed about what the rules are. They are easy to find - just go on The Hill, The Messenger, Politico or the likes of Salon or Vox for something more left wing. Now they may be wrong and you are right but they do not seem too bothered about the rules argument.
The general view is that, if it is going to happen, it will happen at the Convention where the various candidates will jockey for Biden’s pledges and a candidate will be selected
They can suggest what they like. I'm sure there are Tory activists who'd like Sunak to stand down. Doesn't mean they can do anything about it.
There seems to be a misconception here of what the Convention is. It's not a gathering of the Democrats' great and good (though they will be there); it's as much a stage-managed electoral college as, well, the Electoral College. And Biden will have pretty much every elected delegate pledged to him. It will not be a contest; it will be a coronation. Biden will have been accepted as the Democratic candidate long before July, by media, public and party colleagues alike.
'Not being fussed about the rules' is flying in the face of Johnson's Iron Law of Politics.
But...
If, say, Biden decided in June that he could not stand (a new health issue maybe), he would presumably announce that, and all those delegate pledged to him would do what exactly?
If, say, Biden had a heart attack in June - enough to cause him to withdraw from running again but not to stand down as president, as he could still do the job for the time being - then he would have a choice between recommending an alternative to his delegates, or freeing them up to vote as they saw fit - or some combination of the two. Presumably there'd have to be some arrangement whereby potential candidates could lobby, campaign and so on.
That said, I'd still expect the first ballot to go ahead on the primary count, not least to satisfy states where rules bind delegates to candidates. Biden would then decline the nomination and free up delegates.
But that's far from a "30%+" chance.
I’ve said before I have got some of the Dem Governors on at 100/1 to 200/1 for such an eventuality - I’m not treating Biden dropping out as a probability (and I don’t think I mentioned 30%+) but, at those odds, I’m more than happy to have a bet.
You didn't, but BenPointer did, in the fifth tweet in the thread.
FWIW, triple-digit odds for the likes of Newsom seems fair enough as cover. Indeed, if Harris gets dropped as VP (not likely but possible) then you have two routes to the presidency open up.
Fwiw the betting is about in line with a 30% chance of Biden pulling out.
But question for you. I know you think Trump has the GOP nomination locked up but let's assume he somehow crashes and they pick Haley or some other non-threat to democracy instead.
In that case do you think Biden is more likely to pull out? ie do you think the prospect of Trump getting back is to any extent a factor in Biden going for a 2nd term?
I think we're past that point. The main thing is that Biden wants to run. I agree that he'd be more likely to lose against Haley but I don't think that's going to weigh much with him at all. I wouldn't entirely rule it out but Trump would have to crash pretty soon - the longer it goes, the harder it becomes to voluntarily withdraw without it getting very messy.
Right thanks. Well if it is Trump I not only expect Joe to run, I really hope he does. He'd beat him again imo. Course and distance form. And this time he's an incumbent with a solid record. He's too old to run again in an ideal world but Donald Trump with the GOP nomination is about as far from an ideal world as you can get.
What is behind Huddersfield’s remarkable house price boom?
Certainly not TransPennine Express.
I don't think an 8.7% price rise constitutes a "house price boom".
It does for Huddersfield ?
I don't believe the 8.7%.
The biggest data set, which is the Land Registry records of sold prices, says that prices in the Local Authority area of Kirklees, of which Huddersfield is about 35-40%, fell slightly in that period, and was coming off average price rises of 10% in the previous year.
Selectively, the villages have been doing OK and gentrifying from urban flight, Slaithwaite especially, but, no, I don't really recognise this.
But, yes, the 30 mins to Manchester, 20 to Leeds, 6tph, thing did work in the past, even through the 2019 timetable change, problem was that only the county lines gangs had realised fully at that point.
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
The question of where the buck stops becomes increasingly sharp.
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
Davey's case would be stronger still, if he continues to make it after resigning on the principle of ministerial responsibility. Though I admit that went out of fashion with Lord Carrington.
As far as where the buck stops, it ought to do so in multiple locations. This is not the responsibility of one, of even of a few individuals (and Davey bears less responsibility than most).
Yes, I agree. So even if Vennels, for example,is culpable, she will not have taken decisions alone and without advice.
Ugh, Starmer really hates aspiration and those parents who want to do best for their kids.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
My heart bleeds. Obviously the 93% who don't send their kids to private school lack aspiration and don't want to do their best for their kids.
Though I reckon anybody who can afford £17,600 a year could probably rustle up another £3,500 from the back of the sofa. Or the schools could take the hit by reducing their costs.
Ugh, Starmer really hates aspiration and those parents who want to do best for their kids.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
The question of where the buck stops becomes increasingly sharp.
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
Davey's case would be stronger still, if he continues to make it after resigning on the principle of ministerial responsibility. Though I admit that went out of fashion with Lord Carrington.
As far as where the buck stops, it ought to do so in multiple locations. This is not the responsibility of one, of even of a few individuals (and Davey bears less responsibility than most).
There's little or no precedent for a politician resigning from an unconnected position over a decade after leaving the ministerial post in question.
Is that actually true?
Surely amongst the umpteen recent stand-downers we have one who said something on Twitter or bullied or sexually harassed someone or did some con-artistry of some sort a number of years ago?
(But I note that the Defence Secretary is still in post )
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
The question of where the buck stops becomes increasingly sharp.
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
Davey's case would be stronger still, if he continues to make it after resigning on the principle of ministerial responsibility. Though I admit that went out of fashion with Lord Carrington.
As far as where the buck stops, it ought to do so in multiple locations. This is not the responsibility of one, of even of a few individuals (and Davey bears less responsibility than most).
There's little or no precedent for a politician resigning from an unconnected position over a decade after leaving the ministerial post in question.
Is that actually true?
Surely amongst the umpteen recent stand-downers we have one who said something on Twitter or bullied or sexually harassed someone or did some con-artistry a number of years ago?
Not sure if this has been raised elsewhere and it's a very London-centric story but the Standard has gone in with both barrels against Sadiq Khan (no surprise, they don't really like him).
As anticipated, the £30 million with which Khan bought off the RMT on Sunday afternoon and prevented a week of crippling strikes though only to a point of which more in a moment has acted like a red rag to the ASLEF bull. ASLEF settled in the autumn at 5% having been told it was Transport for London (TfL)'s final offer and there was no more money. How come, ASLEF are now saying, there's now an extra £30 million or roughly £1,800 per worker for the RMT. ASLEF are balloting for a renewal of strike action and have put in a 12% claim.
London business told Khan to week of strikes would cost the capital's economy anyhere up to £500 million so uou could argue £30 million is a reasonable price to pay.
The problem is the suspension of the strike came too late to save hospitality bookings and it was noticeable how quiet Bank Station was at 5pm (almost like pendemic times) as clearly many office workers had made arrangements to WFH (and we know how much that's liked by some on here) in anticipation of the strikes.
Some economic damage has been done - possibly not £500 million - but it seems ASLEF have "lost all trust" in Khan. The Conservatives are asking where the £30 million has come from while Khan is claiming he's the economic savour for stopping the strikes.
Mrs Biden won’t want her husband to retire because once he loses the purpose of the job she’ll know his physical and mental descent might be swift.
Mr Biden is surely realistic enough to know he might die in office during a second term, but that might sound a bit of fun to him. He’d enjoy the legacy of beating the threat to democracy not once but twice, and try and match ERII in the scale of his exit show. Plus he’d get to be an answer on pub quizzes in every Irish bar forever.
He does need to think a bit more carefully about running mate but if he fixes that then he’ll like the idea of running. Also we don’t know what he might have planned for early on his second term. I’ve got a pretty strong suspicion given the legislative priorities of the Senate in 2023. And it would be an utterly compelling reason to want to run again even if from a wheelchair (don’t rule that out actually, the second FDR huzzah!).
Ugh, Starmer really hates aspiration and those parents who want to do best for their kids.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
My heart bleeds. Obviously the 93% who don't send their kids to private school lack aspiration and don't want to do their best for their kids.
Though I reckon anybody who can afford £17,600 a year could probably rustle up another £3,500 from the back of the sofa. Or the schools could take the hit by reducing their costs.
These parents are the best of Britain, we pay our taxes so the kids of proles can be educated and nobly make sure the state sector doesn't have to educate our kids so the proles can get all the attention.
But being serious for a moment, there are a lot of families who really couldn't afford the hike, so the state has to educate more kids with less.
What I would do is grandfather current kids in private schools and apply VAT to all new entrants.
I can afford the VAT hike and think that whilst state schools crumble I shouldn't get a tax break not all parents are as lucky as me.
Ed Davey's defence sounds a bit pathetic: "I deeply regret that I was lied to on such a scale … I hope they understand that I pushed really hard on the Post Office for answers and I got the same answers time and again."
The question of where the buck stops becomes increasingly sharp.
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
Davey's case would be stronger still, if he continues to make it after resigning on the principle of ministerial responsibility. Though I admit that went out of fashion with Lord Carrington.
As far as where the buck stops, it ought to do so in multiple locations. This is not the responsibility of one, of even of a few individuals (and Davey bears less responsibility than most).
There's little or no precedent for a politician resigning from an unconnected position over a decade after leaving the ministerial post in question.
Is that actually true?
Surely amongst the umpteen recent stand-downers we have one who said something on Twitter or bullied or sexually harassed someone or did some con-artistry a number of years ago?
(But I note that Mr Shapps is still in post )
Nick Brown? No one’s allowed to know exactly why
There are several amongst the allegations aired which lead to the Parliamentary Standards for Westminster being revised in 2017/18.
The first one listed is Michael Fallon resigning as Defence Secretary over behaviour he acknowledged from more than a decade before. There are others.
Ugh, Starmer really hates aspiration and those parents who want to do best for their kids.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
My heart bleeds. Obviously the 93% who don't send their kids to private school lack aspiration and don't want to do their best for their kids.
Though I reckon anybody who can afford £17,600 a year could probably rustle up another £3,500 from the back of the sofa. Or the schools could take the hit by reducing their costs.
These parents are the best of Britain, we pay our taxes so the kids of proles can be educated and nobly make sure the state sector doesn't have to educate our kids so the proles can get all the attention.
But being serious for a moment, there are a lot of families who really couldn't afford the hike, so the state has to educate more kids with less.
What I would do is grandfather current kids in private schools and apply VAT to all new entrants.
I can afford the VAT hike and think that whilst state schools crumble I shouldn't get a tax break not all parents are as lucky as me.
Can’t see how it’s compatible with age discrimination laws. No vat on private education for 1-4 or for 18+. But there would be for 5-18.
Ugh, Starmer really hates aspiration and those parents who want to do best for their kids.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
I wonder where Camila Batmanghelidjh sat with respect to the NU10K? Influential third sector director, extensive links with other parts of the political, charity and media establishment, sounds like she's a member. Yet her fall from grace was absolute - even though ultimately unjustified. I thought NU10Kers only failed upwards? I thought they all protected each other - yet it seems like the absolute opposite in her case.
NU10K is an right-wing invention, no such thing exists.
There are influential people, some of whom would obviously be among the 10,000 most influential in the UK, but once you get beyond the obvious, you soon get into argument.
Here's a (fairly) random list of a dozen influential people - are they amongst the top 10k influencers? Are they in the 'so-called' NU10K?
Alan Bates David Cameron King Charles Suella Braverman Gary Lineker Paul Dacre Sue Gray Frederick Barclay Carol Vorderman Rishi Sunak Richard Tice Rachel Reeves
Here's an example. There once was a leading economist who was sent to prison in disgrace for lying about a speeding offence. After her time was served he friends in the media did all they could to rehabilitate her - evert time the BBC needed an economist, you've guessed it, dear old ex-con Vicki Pryce (for it is she) would be wheeled out.
If this was a real conspiracy surely she'd have avoided jail altogether. She's done her time, she's good at her job, I don't see why she shouldn't work tbh.
I think her rehabilitation was a bit easier than others, shall we say. Take Danny Baker - a career ended because he made an off the cuff joke that some 'chose' to call racist.
Danny Baker likened Harry & Meghan's child to a chimpanzee. If that's not racist, what is?
What's the context?
I call my children monkeys all the time. Especially my youngest, that's my nickname for her, "monkey" and if I'm out and about and want her to eg hold my hand before we cross the road I'll say something like "come on, monkey". The fact she's always jumping around and climbing onto the back of the sofa may or may not be related to the inspiration of the nickname.
Wouldn't very often say it about other peoples kids though. But I have called other people's kids "cheeky monkeys" before.
According to wiki:
Baker posted an image on Twitter of a couple holding hands with a chimpanzee dressed in clothes. He had added the caption: "Royal Baby leaves hospital," referring to the recent birth of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, son of Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.
Baker claimed - and I believe him - that he had no idea Meghan Markle is mixed race (he thought she was white) so the remark was entirely innocent, and devoid of any racial intent
Bless
You think Danny Baker is personally racist AND thought it would be funny to call a race-mixed royal child a chimpanzee?
You have an ability to see inside a man’s soul which I am kinda glad I do not possess
Ugh, Starmer really hates aspiration and those parents who want to do best for their kids.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
I predict that that the extra tax would be paid for partly out of price increases, partly by reducing activities currently done for the wider community as part of charitable status, and partly by withdrawing the ~£500m-£1bn currently spent by Independent Schools on helping poorer pupils.
Ugh, Starmer really hates aspiration and those parents who want to do best for their kids.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
My heart bleeds. Obviously the 93% who don't send their kids to private school lack aspiration and don't want to do their best for their kids.
Though I reckon anybody who can afford £17,600 a year could probably rustle up another £3,500 from the back of the sofa. Or the schools could take the hit by reducing their costs.
These parents are the best of Britain, we pay our taxes so the kids of proles can be educated and nobly make sure the state sector doesn't have to educate our kids so the proles can get all the attention.
But being serious for a moment, there are a lot of families who really couldn't afford the hike, so the state has to educate more kids with less.
What I would do is grandfather current kids in private schools and apply VAT to all new entrants.
I can afford the VAT hike and think that whilst state schools crumble I shouldn't get a tax break not all parents are as lucky as me.
Can’t see how it’s compatible with age discrimination laws. No vat on private education for 1-4 or for 18+. But there would be for 5-18.
I reckon it is also racial discrimination given how many Asian heritage parents send their kids to private schools.
Comments
Some of the best diversity training I've ever had.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-67884844
Carriage resumes normal activity.
The BBC cites Satoshi Nakajima who worked at NTT (Japan’s premier telecommunications company) before becoming a foundational member of Microsoft. Satoshi characterises Fujitsu as a zombie company staggering on thanks to its close relationship with the government. The cozy relationship ensures its continual profitability despite the ossified company culture and inadequate tech capabilities."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/no-one-is-talking-about-fujitsu-in-japan/
“Secret Jewish tunnels”. From 2015
Hey you, over there
What's it like to have no hair?
Some are saying she’s actually 26
Liverpool legend Sadio Mane marries his '18-year-old long-term girlfriend' in Senegal
He's finally tied the knot after 'years of paying her bills while she was at school' 👇
https://x.com/mailsport/status/1744726038972936411?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba3E-Ha5Efc
It’s probably best
"Look Mommy - a baby maid!"
FWIW, triple-digit odds for the likes of Newsom seems fair enough as cover. Indeed, if Harris gets dropped as VP (not likely but possible) then you have two routes to the presidency open up.
An employee at our firm has asked to be paid in Crypto and final decision has been referred to me!
68% No
32% Yes
That said, I agree that it's unlikely he's racist. As others have said, if he were, and been idiotic enough to post what he did *because* he intended it to be a racist jab (and expect not to be punished for it), then he'd have done other things along the same lines. Indeed, he couldn't have got through his Saturday shows - which relied greatly on linking ideas and themes, all live - without slipping up somewhere.
So Jo and Andy turn up at the house, get sat down and get offered drinks by the foster mother.
Jo - I’ll have coffee, black, no sugar please.
Andy - milky tea, two sugars please.
Making sure she’s got the order straight in her head the woman says ‘So, you’re (pointing at Jo) black, and you’re (turning to point at Andy) white.’ Poor woman pauses for a beat, realises what she’s done, and dashes off into the kitchen.
Jo thought it was hilarious. She told me the story of Xmas Eve and tears were running down her cheeks. Being a professional she didn’t comment on it at all, totally ignored it. But she imagined the poor woman stood in the kitchen, cheeks flushed with embarrassment, going ‘fuck, fuck, fuck’! Jo can’t wait to get to know the woman a bit better so they can laugh about it.
Perhaps you should offer Flanian Pobble Beads instead [only exchangeable for other Flanian Pobble Beads, if I recall]
Another issue is if the price of that Crypto goes up is it a capital gain and have we unwillingly partaken in tax evasion?
And I suspect everyone in the courtroom knows that. Hence, it's actually fairly low stakes for Trump's lawyers. Make the legal arguments such as they are, stick to their guns, ride out the inevitable scepticism (delivered with a twinkle in the presiding judges' eyes), pick up the pay cheque.
UNH Survey Center
@UNHSurveyCenter
Haley Within Striking Distance of Trump in New Hampshire
#NHPolitics #FITN
@CNN
I went to A & E at midnight with chest pains and again had a lot of tests and bloods taken
The doctor and consultant reaffirmed my need for my pacemaker operation on the 6th February, but it was in order for me to go home and rest and avoid coffee but if further issues arose to again present at A & E
I was attended to relatively quickly but the wait time for most was 17 hours
One of the nurses said they had patients in A & E for over 48 hours.
All the staff were and are exceptional, but overwhelmed, and I have no idea how this crisis across all administrations is resolved
As it so happens, and if I wasn't struggling enough, Trump appears on Sky hitting out right left and centre and to be honest a shiver went through me as I just felt he is going to win this - why is this even possible
Best example when it comes to HMRC is to talk about how they handle VAT paid in Euros. They will work on the exchange rate of the day the invoice was sent not the day the company gets paid it’s you that takes the risk there .
Equally look at how HMRC treat payment using Gold and similar
Basically just run away
I was refereeing a Sunday morning soccer game. One team was playing in red and all the players were white. The other team was in blue and all the players were black. As was my normal practice I would indicate the direction of a free-kick or throw in by calling out 'red ball' or 'blue ball' as appropriate. All was fine and perfectly normal until there was a tussle for the ball under my nose involving a minor infringement. I blew up sharply, indicated the direction of play and announced 'black ball'.
Ground, please open up and swallow me.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/08/ed-davey-accuses-post-office-of-conspiracy-of-lies-as-he-defends-role-in-scandal
What is behind Huddersfield’s remarkable house price boom?
Certainly not TransPennine Express.
Which some think isn't an issue. But I do.
My friend was astonished and looked at her and asked “how can you tell?”. Much laughter ensued when I explained to both parties.
Surely your company has a right to reimburse with the current legal tender?
But question for you. I know you think Trump has the GOP nomination locked up but let's assume he somehow crashes and they pick Haley or some other non-threat to democracy instead.
In that case do you think Biden is more likely to pull out? ie do you think the prospect of Trump getting back is to any extent a factor in Biden going for a 2nd term?
By Dominic Gates Seattle Times aerospace reporter
When the Boeing 737 MAX 9’s side blew out explosively on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 Friday evening, a 15-year-old high school student was in the window seat in the row directly ahead, his shoulder beside the edge of the gaping hole.
His mother, who was seated beside him, in the middle seat of row 25, described the moment as a very loud bang, like “a bomb exploding.”
As the air in the passenger cabin rushed out, the Oregon woman [Faye] turned and saw her son’s seat twisting backward toward the hole, his seat headrest ripped off and sucked into the void, her son’s arms jerked upward.
“He and his seat were pulled back and towards the exterior of the plane in the direction of the hole,” she said. “I reached over and grabbed his body and pulled him towards me over the armrest.” . . .
“I was probably as filled with adrenaline as I’ve ever been in my life,” Faye said.
“I had my arms underneath his arm, kind of hooked under his shoulders and wrapped around his back,” she continued. “I did not realize until after the flight that his clothing had been torn off of his upper body.” . . .
A photo taken after the plane landed shows the boy’s seat pulled back, though by then it had returned partially to its position. At the moment of the incident, Faye’s face was pressed against the rear of her son’s right shoulder and she said the seat “was pulled back to such a degree that I was looking directly out of the hole into the night sky.”
The plane’s oxygen masks had dropped from the ceiling in front of the passengers. The woman in the aisle seat of row 25, a stranger to Faye and her son, put on her own mask, then reached across Faye and put the mask on the son.
With difficulty, she turned Faye’s head and managed to get a mask on her too. Then she grabbed onto Faye as she in turn kept a tight grip on her son.
“We were both holding on to my son,” Faye said. “I was just holding him and saying repeatedly, ‘It’s OK. It’s OK. It’s OK, buddy. It’s OK. It’s OK.’ “
The boy had been wearing a T-shirt and a V-neck pullover windbreaker. Both were ripped off his body. . . .
As the outrush of air subsided, Faye was gripped with a fear that another panel might pop out in their row. There was no such panel, but she didn’t know that. . .
With the noise of the air outside and with masks on, the seatmate couldn’t hear her.
At that point, “things had stopped flying out. I could see that his bag was on the floor,” Faye said. “I realized the pressure is now no longer such that we are risking getting pulled out by getting out of our seats.” . . .
Until then, Faye had seen no flight attendant. As they unbuckled, she reached up and pushed the call button.
A flight attendant came to their row. “I saw the shock on her face,” Faye said. “I remember thinking she didn’t know there was a hole in this plane” until that moment. . .
It is obvious that senior people lied. Suspicion hangs over the PO Board, the Government and Fujitsu - and possibly all three in various measures.
Davey is accusing the PO, and doubling down on it. Board members will be giving testimony to the Inquiry soon, under oath. Not sure if Fujitsu will do so officially, but one of their former employers, Gareth Jenkins, certainly will.
After the testimonies we should be in a good position to judge where that buck has settled.
https://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote/2aj1d2bGqyhduSmYaLIxE02f9CM
..The court also brought up several times the hypotheticals the DoJ outlined in their briefs - what if a president orders the murder of a political rival? What if a president sells pardons? What if a president accepts bribes? After a lot of back and forth with Trump's lawyers refusing to answer the question, he finally admitted that a president could do all those things and be immune from criminal prosecution unless he was impeached and convicted for the same actions...
Trump's attorney's argument is literally that unless impeached, and found guilty by the Senate, he cannot subsequently be prosecuted for any act while President.
That, of course, is despite Trump's own lawyers arguing, during his impeachment, that if he were not convicted, he could still be criminally prosecuted after he left office.
Though I admit that went out of fashion with Lord Carrington.
As far as where the buck stops, it ought to do so in multiple locations. This is not the responsibility of one, of even of a few individuals (and Davey bears less responsibility than most).
The Guardian and Numbers (for the 94th time), I'm afraid.
As for The Donald, well, this too will pass.
Personally recommend quasi-zen semi-meditation as effective way to ease strain on heart, mind AND bowels.
PLUS in your case you can look forward to Valentines by the boxcar (or lifeboat?) on 14 Feb!
Given the furore over his appointment (which was justifiable to a fair degree) Democrats won't admit it... but Kavanaugh in particular is a conservative but pretty non-partisan jurist, and neither Gorsuch nor Coney-Barrett are in Trump's pocket. People forget that he gave to those three, but their names emerged from the GOP establishment, and they know he cannot taketh away - they are conservative judges, not Trump's golf club buddies.
14th Amendment is another matter. That's genuinely arguable and it'd be a big call to say Trump is ineligible.
I did mention to a couple of nurses how in 1964 my wife, at the alter, promised to ' love, honour and obey' and how I have to remind her of this on occasions only for her to counter by saying she had a private word with the Good Lord and he agreed the 'obey' bit was annulled.
The nurses commented on how much they love my wife !!!!!
It would certainly grab the headlines.
https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1744732822445957583
The prospect of significant pre-election tax cuts and spending promises risk the ire of the “bond vigilantes”, BlackRock has said, warning of the temptation of political parties to loosen fiscal policy this year.
Vivek Paul, UK chief investment strategist at BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, told Bloomberg that Labour and the Conservatives “may be more tempted to promise looser fiscal policy — the more this occurs, the greater the likelihood of the return of the bond vigilantes. In the lead-up to this year’s UK election, we’re watching the fiscal policy stance.”
Bond vigilantes refer to investors who can help drive up the cost of a government’s borrowing by dumping sovereign debt en masse, pushing up yields. The UK suffered at the hands of financial markets in the autumn of 2022, when yields on long-dated gilts rose to record highs on the back of Liz Truss’s promise for £50 billion in debt-funded tax cuts in the so-called mini-budget.
“The shadow of the autumn 2022 UK gilt crisis still hangs over the pre-election debate so far,” Paul wrote. The Bank of England was forced to intervene to buy up 30-year gilts to prevent fire sales of bonds by embattled pension funds to raise cash. Truss was ousted from office after 44 days.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/blackrock-warns-of-another-bond-market-rout-as-general-election-looms-sn9qplm67
https://www.thefp.com/p/biden-all-about-trump-jan-6-2024
The biggest data set, which is the Land Registry records of sold prices, says that prices in the Local Authority area of Kirklees, of which Huddersfield is about 35-40%, fell slightly in that period, and was coming off average price rises of 10% in the previous year. That does not sound consistent with the claim, to me.
https://landregistry.data.gov.uk/app/ukhpi/browse?from=2022-10-01&location=http://landregistry.data.gov.uk/id/region/kirklees&to=2023-10-01&lang=en
It's possible to submit SQL queries, and I daresay there is a way of filtering by HD* postcode as it's a good setup. But I'm not going that far down the rabbit hole.
Labour would block parents from dodging VAT on private school fees through paying for years of schooling upfront, Bridget Phillipson has suggested.
The shadow education secretary said that the Labour Party would ensure that its planned legislation, which would charge 20 per cent VAT on fees if enacted, leaves no loopholes for parents to avoid paying the tax.
Schools have warned they could have to close because tens of thousands of pupils in England will be priced out of private education under a Labour government.
The party’s policy means that parents paying average non-boarding secondary school fees of around £17,600 a year could need to find around an extra £3,500 for each child.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/09/labour-will-block-vat-loophole-for-private-school-fees/
But, yes, the 30 mins to Manchester, 20 to Leeds, 6tph, thing did work in the past, even through the 2019 timetable change, problem was that only the county lines gangs had realised fully at that point.
Though I reckon anybody who can afford £17,600 a year could probably rustle up another £3,500 from the back of the sofa. Or the schools could take the hit by reducing their costs.
Surely amongst the umpteen recent stand-downers we have one who said something on Twitter or bullied or sexually harassed someone or did some con-artistry of some sort a number of years ago?
(But I note that the Defence Secretary is still in post
Not sure if this has been raised elsewhere and it's a very London-centric story but the Standard has gone in with both barrels against Sadiq Khan (no surprise, they don't really like him).
As anticipated, the £30 million with which Khan bought off the RMT on Sunday afternoon and prevented a week of crippling strikes though only to a point of which more in a moment has acted like a red rag to the ASLEF bull. ASLEF settled in the autumn at 5% having been told it was Transport for London (TfL)'s final offer and there was no more money. How come, ASLEF are now saying, there's now an extra £30 million or roughly £1,800 per worker for the RMT. ASLEF are balloting for a renewal of strike action and have put in a 12% claim.
London business told Khan to week of strikes would cost the capital's economy anyhere up to £500 million so uou could argue £30 million is a reasonable price to pay.
The problem is the suspension of the strike came too late to save hospitality bookings and it was noticeable how quiet Bank Station was at 5pm (almost like pendemic times) as clearly many office workers had made arrangements to WFH (and we know how much that's liked by some on here) in anticipation of the strikes.
Some economic damage has been done - possibly not £500 million - but it seems ASLEF have "lost all trust" in Khan. The Conservatives are asking where the £30 million has come from while Khan is claiming he's the economic savour for stopping the strikes.
Mr Biden is surely realistic enough to know he might die in office during a second term, but that might sound a bit of fun to him. He’d enjoy the legacy of beating the threat to democracy not once but twice, and try and match ERII in the scale of his exit show. Plus he’d get to be an answer on pub quizzes in every Irish bar forever.
He does need to think a bit more carefully about running mate but if he fixes that then he’ll like the idea of running. Also we don’t know what he might have planned for early on his second term. I’ve got a pretty strong suspicion given the legislative priorities of the Senate in 2023. And it would be an utterly compelling reason to want to run again even if from a wheelchair (don’t rule that out actually, the second FDR huzzah!).
But being serious for a moment, there are a lot of families who really couldn't afford the hike, so the state has to educate more kids with less.
What I would do is grandfather current kids in private schools and apply VAT to all new entrants.
I can afford the VAT hike and think that whilst state schools crumble I shouldn't get a tax break not all parents are as lucky as me.
The first one listed is Michael Fallon resigning as Defence Secretary over behaviour he acknowledged from more than a decade before. There are others.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Westminster_sexual_misconduct_allegations
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/politics/teesworks-private-partners-make-ps93m-from-plot-of-land-it-bought-from-public-sector-for-ps100-4472054 (£££)
Proof the private sector is more efficient.
IMO it is a nutty policy by Starmer.