Jerusalem Post: The IDF chief of staff "hinted that the timing of the attack was not very imminent during a visit to the Arrow air defense battery of Battalion 136. He said, 'We are enabling a home front policy to at least give citizens this Passover week to live almost like normal because we completely trust you and your readiness.'" [Note: Passover runs from April 22 to April 30.] https://jpost.com/breaking-news/article-797445
She wants to abolish the Supreme Court. Not just leave the European Court. Not just abolish the HRA. But leave the UK Supreme Court as well. I think the only remaining step is to abolish the Senate and send Tarkin in with that new toy he keeps banging on about. ☹️
Well, it's not as though the Supreme Court is some ancient institution or something, but I'm not really clear why it would help her cause. Listen to people like Jolyon Maugham and they reckon the current Supreme Court is supine towards government and not standing up to it enough, and would judicial functions being exercised through the Lords again suddenly stop legal challenges or something?
The fox batterer and his ilk are upset that the U.K. Supreme Court has not declared its supremacy over Parliament.
Which would obviate the need to win elections and things - just run the country from there. Bit like the US.
Because that is working so well.
The Supreme Court is, in essence, a committee of the House of Lords* rebadged and moved to the other side of Parliament Square. Do those who advocate its abolition want to return to the status quo ante and, if not, what will be the final arbiter of legal questions of application across the UK?
(*The SC doesn’t hear Scots Law criminal appeals because the post-Union House of Lords, as a successor of the pre-1707 Scottish Parliament, found it had inherited no such jurisdiction from that body, but that it had done so in civil matters)
It does still annoy me though that Blair with his fatal reverence for all things Yankeeside chose such an utterly naff name.
What was wrong with 'Judicial Committee of the Privy Council' (which I believe is one name it still legally uses when hearing cases from various Commonwealth realms)? Quintessentially British and no unfortunate parallels to the criminal organisation in DC.
It's a small thing, but it might have helped casual observers better appreciate its position and authority, since a lot of people probably think our Supreme Court has far more wide ranging powers than it in fact has.
Not as confusing for first time viewers of Law & Order or a Trump trial in discovering that New York has a Supreme Court which is not the court of last resort.
Actually, the alternative was Mordaunt if a handful of MPs hadn't been twats.
PM4PM - What might have been... 😢
They can rue that decision as they stand by the Returning Officer.
Do you think there's any chance she could hold out against UNS and hold her seat to have a run as LOTO?
She has her own unique problem with the voters.
That she is obviously a pillock.
No, I mean Penny. Do you think Penny can hold out against UNS? I know on paper her seat will go solidly Labour but could she hold on do you think?
Tricky, but I think some Conservative candidates have a significantly better offering to the voters. I believe she will outperform the party vote. Whether it will be enough...dunno.
The most successful thing Truss did in her time as PM was attend a funeral.
Even the funeral was messed up. In order to diminish her rival, Liz Truss gave Penny Mordaunt the non-job of Leader of the House. It is hard to launch another leadership bid without a spending department to control. Truss would have been astonished to find that after HMQ died, its bundled role of Lord President of the Council meant Penny Mordaunt was front and centre of both the funeral and coronation.
I'm genuinely quite surprised at this post. I'm quite used to a fairly ugly pile on here when it comes to Truss, and this thread is one of the grimmer ones, but the idea that as she uprooted her family and adjusted them to living in Number 10, created a cabinet, and rushed to pull together a plan for growth, she was cursing herself because she hadn't calculated that Penny Mordaunt would get to walk behind a coffin, is bizarre. Not sure what it says about Truss, but it doesn't do a great deal for you. I've always found you sensible, but a lot of people here have a Truss blind spot.
Truss is basically an uber libertarian, probably more at home with ultra small state conservative DC think tanks than farmers in her Norfolk constituency
What uber libertarian policies has she proposed/pursued?
She is anti civil service, wants to slash taxes and the size of the state and is socially very liberal on most issues
What has pointing out institutional issues within the civil service got to do with libertarianism?
Truss's tax cuts, had they been implemented in full, would have amounted to £25 billion being left in peoples' and companies' pockets, from £1,100 billion of government receipts in 2026-27. How is that relatively modest level of tax cut, still leaving taxes at a 70 year high, 'uber-libertarian'?
But can you point to any 'uber-libertarian' social policies pursued by her?
She wants to slash the civil service, slash regulation, slash taxes etc.
She has generally voted the pro choice line on abortion, is pro same sex marriage and at university wanted to legalise cannabis. She also is generally more liberal on immigration than many Tories (of course initially backing Remain and continued EU free movement)
Truss is basically an uber libertarian, probably more at home with ultra small state conservative DC think tanks than farmers in her Norfolk constituency
What uber libertarian policies has she proposed/pursued?
She is anti civil service, wants to slash taxes and the size of the state and is socially very liberal on most issues
What has pointing out institutional issues within the civil service got to do with libertarianism?
Truss's tax cuts, had they been implemented in full, would have amounted to £25 billion being left in peoples' and companies' pockets, from £1,100 billion of government receipts in 2026-27. How is that relatively modest level of tax cut, still leaving taxes at a 70 year high, 'uber-libertarian'?
But can you point to any 'uber-libertarian' social policies pursued by her?
She wants to slash the civil service, slash regulation, slash taxes etc.
She has generally voted the pro choice line on abortion, is pro same sex marriage and at university wanted to legalise cannabis. She also is generally more liberal on immigration than many Tories (of course initially backing Remain and continued EU free movement)
You can't point to anything remotely concrete to support your hypothesis can you?
If you added that there was a fire in the room and thus time was of the essence Liz might not even object to that assessment. Though I think even she now says she didn't need to move quite so fast.
Actually, the alternative was Mordaunt if a handful of MPs hadn't been twats.
PM4PM - What might have been... 😢
They can rue that decision as they stand by the Returning Officer.
What is all this Penny Mordaunt stuff? I mean, really.
Plenty have said she is useless, lazy, barely competent in minor ministerial positions and, OK, some of them were David Frost, but still. Truss got on and Mordaunt didn't.
So, my only question would be, how useless is she?
What if Sunak faces a confidence vote after the locals, takes enough damage from the VONC that the men in grey suits get him before he goes to the country, and Penny is the one. What then?
Does she plan her pitch for a couple of months before going to the country or does she call it on day 1? Could we take 6 weeks of her poorly prepared schtick across a range of topics at PMQs before an election was called or would she be exposed as utterly clueless before that point? If she tries being PM for a while before calling an election could she be shown up so badly that the Tory party have another 60 day coup to get rid of her? And how would that go down?
Or would it all happen on the campaign trail, too late for anything to be done? Could she be a British Kim Campbell, who rode high in the polls during the campaign but had collapsed by polling day.
At best she has the patter of a pound shop Boris, and does that float the voters' boats these days, at worst she will be so out of her depth that what transpired might be a catastrophe unthinkable even under Sunak.
And the key question remains: Exactly how useless is she?
The most successful thing Truss did in her time as PM was attend a funeral.
Even the funeral was messed up. In order to diminish her rival, Liz Truss gave Penny Mordaunt the non-job of Leader of the House. It is hard to launch another leadership bid without a spending department to control. Truss would have been astonished to find that after HMQ died, its bundled role of Lord President of the Council meant Penny Mordaunt was front and centre of both the funeral and coronation.
I'm genuinely quite surprised at this post. I'm quite used to a fairly ugly pile on here when it comes to Truss, and this thread is one of the grimmer ones, but the idea that as she uprooted her family and adjusted them to living in Number 10, created a cabinet, and rushed to pull together a plan for growth, she was cursing herself because she hadn't calculated that Penny Mordaunt would get to walk behind a coffin, is bizarre. Not sure what it says about Truss, but it doesn't do a great deal for you. I've always found you sensible, but a lot of people here have a Truss blind spot.
Truss is basically an uber libertarian, probably more at home with ultra small state conservative DC think tanks than farmers in her Norfolk constituency
What uber libertarian policies has she proposed/pursued?
She is anti civil service, wants to slash taxes and the size of the state and is socially very liberal on most issues
What has pointing out institutional issues within the civil service got to do with libertarianism?
Truss's tax cuts, had they been implemented in full, would have amounted to £25 billion being left in peoples' and companies' pockets, from £1,100 billion of government receipts in 2026-27. How is that relatively modest level of tax cut, still leaving taxes at a 70 year high, 'uber-libertarian'?
But can you point to any 'uber-libertarian' social policies pursued by her?
She wants to slash the civil service, slash regulation, slash taxes etc.
She has generally voted the pro choice line on abortion, is pro same sex marriage and at university wanted to legalise cannabis. She also is generally more liberal on immigration than many Tories (of course initially backing Remain and continued EU free movement)
You can't point to anything remotely concrete to support your hypothesis can you?
Those are all libertarian positions, she wanted to slash the size of the state as she made clear as PM and blames the 'deep state' civil service for blocking her.
Actually, the alternative was Mordaunt if a handful of MPs hadn't been twats.
I well remember contemplating the choice that Tories had when Boris imploded.
1. Penny Mordaunt. A risk. She, alone of all the contenders, could take the fight to Labour and keep the Tories in the game. But unclear whether she had the ability or experience to be a competent PM. But probably a risk worth taking in the circs.
2. Rishi Sunak. The "safe" choice. Man in a suit. Competent, and not likely to embarrass. But not an election-winner in difficult times.
3. Liz Truss. An obvious dud. Tin-eared. Starry-eyed. In the competition because the rightwing factionalists simply had to have a candidate no matter how unqualified. IDS in a wig.
Jerusalem Post: The IDF chief of staff "hinted that the timing of the attack was not very imminent during a visit to the Arrow air defense battery of Battalion 136. He said, 'We are enabling a home front policy to at least give citizens this Passover week to live almost like normal because we completely trust you and your readiness.'" [Note: Passover runs from April 22 to April 30.] https://jpost.com/breaking-news/article-797445
She wants to abolish the Supreme Court. Not just leave the European Court. Not just abolish the HRA. But leave the UK Supreme Court as well. I think the only remaining step is to abolish the Senate and send Tarkin in with that new toy he keeps banging on about. ☹️
Well, it's not as though the Supreme Court is some ancient institution or something, but I'm not really clear why it would help her cause. Listen to people like Jolyon Maugham and they reckon the current Supreme Court is supine towards government and not standing up to it enough, and would judicial functions being exercised through the Lords again suddenly stop legal challenges or something?
The fox batterer and his ilk are upset that the U.K. Supreme Court has not declared its supremacy over Parliament.
Which would obviate the need to win elections and things - just run the country from there. Bit like the US.
Because that is working so well.
The Supreme Court is, in essence, a committee of the House of Lords* rebadged and moved to the other side of Parliament Square. Do those who advocate its abolition want to return to the status quo ante and, if not, what will be the final arbiter of legal questions of application across the UK?
These are footling questions which need not trouble an intellect like Truss.
If you added that there was a fire in the room and thus time was of the essence Liz might not even object to that assessment. Though I think even she now says she didn't need to move quite so fast.
I was firmly of the opinion before the current interview round that Truss's mistakes were poor timing, poor politics, poor presentation, poor choice of people - and that she could have done it if she'd handled those better. Two of the interviewers, Farage and Nelson, put that point to her in different ways. She was absolutely adamant that there was no way that she could have achieved anything like the necessary growth plan with the institutional resistance she faced. I still think a lot could have been done if she'd went about it better, but I'm now 70/30 of that opinion whereas I was 100.
6 of the 18 jurors in the Trump case (12 plus 6 alternates) were sworn in today.
The case doesn't sit Wednesday. May have a trial jury by Friday. (If not, Passover start of next week so the trial - and jury selection - doesn't resume until Thursday next week.)
Actually, the alternative was Mordaunt if a handful of MPs hadn't been twats.
PM4PM - What might have been... 😢
They can rue that decision as they stand by the Returning Officer.
What is all this Penny Mordaunt stuff? I mean, really.
Plenty have said she is useless, lazy, barely competent in minor ministerial positions and, OK, some of them were David Frost, but still. Truss got on and Mordaunt didn't.
So, my only question would be, how useless is she?
What if Sunak faces a confidence vote after the locals, takes enough damage from the VONC that the men in grey suits get him before he goes to the country, and Penny is the one. What then?
Does she plan her pitch for a couple of months before going to the country or does she call it on day 1? Could we take 6 weeks of her poorly prepared schtick across a range of topics at PMQs before an election was called or would she be exposed as utterly clueless before that point? If she tries being PM for a while before calling an election could she be shown up so badly that the Tory party have another 60 day coup to get rid of her? And how would that go down?
Or would it all happen on the campaign trail, too late for anything to be done? Could she be a British Kim Campbell, who rode high in the polls during the campaign but had collapsed by polling day.
At best she has the patter of a pound shop Boris, and does that float the voters' boats these days, at worst she will be so out of her depth that what transpired might be a catastrophe unthinkable even under Sunak.
And the key question remains: Exactly how useless is she?
She calls it on Day One.
If she decides she wants to Do Something Big first, it won't be mere theatrics at PMQ - it will be something that's sold as megatoughly ballsome against boats and immigrants. If I'm right, this has already been planned.
Actually, the alternative was Mordaunt if a handful of MPs hadn't been twats.
I well remember contemplating the choice that Tories had when Boris imploded.
1. Penny Mordaunt. A risk. She, alone of all the contenders, could take the fight to Labour and keep the Tories in the game. But unclear whether she had the ability or experience to be a competent PM. But probably a risk worth taking in the circs.
2. Rishi Sunak. The "safe" choice. Man in a suit. Competent, and not likely to embarrass. But not an election-winner in difficult times.
3. Liz Truss. An obvious dud. Tin-eared. Starry-eyed. In the competition because the rightwing factionalists simply had to have a candidate no matter how unqualified. IDS in a wig.
Truss is basically an uber libertarian, probably more at home with ultra small state conservative DC think tanks than farmers in her Norfolk constituency
What uber libertarian policies has she proposed/pursued?
She is anti civil service, wants to slash taxes and the size of the state and is socially very liberal on most issues
What has pointing out institutional issues within the civil service got to do with libertarianism?
Truss's tax cuts, had they been implemented in full, would have amounted to £25 billion being left in peoples' and companies' pockets, from £1,100 billion of government receipts in 2026-27. How is that relatively modest level of tax cut, still leaving taxes at a 70 year high, 'uber-libertarian'?
But can you point to any 'uber-libertarian' social policies pursued by her?
She wants to abolish the Equality Act.
Judging by the spectacular amount of reactionary ignorant rubbish being posted by @148grss and others on the previous thread but one - all of it detrimental to the interests of women (& don't give me @Topping's "who knows what a woman is?" bollocks - men have no difficulty knowing this, especially when it comes to putting them in their place) - I am surprised she does not get more support on here.
Abolishing laws preventing discrimination against women is probably very popular amongst a certain demographic.
She's batshit insane. But then so are lots of voters.
The Tories IMO will be obliterated at the next election. So it scarcely matters who they elect as leader.
Other than for good governance, having a proper opposition to hold the government to account and so on. But who cares about any of that these days?
Truss is basically an uber libertarian, probably more at home with ultra small state conservative DC think tanks than farmers in her Norfolk constituency
What uber libertarian policies has she proposed/pursued?
She is anti civil service, wants to slash taxes and the size of the state and is socially very liberal on most issues
What has pointing out institutional issues within the civil service got to do with libertarianism?
Truss's tax cuts, had they been implemented in full, would have amounted to £25 billion being left in peoples' and companies' pockets, from £1,100 billion of government receipts in 2026-27. How is that relatively modest level of tax cut, still leaving taxes at a 70 year high, 'uber-libertarian'?
But can you point to any 'uber-libertarian' social policies pursued by her?
She wants to slash the civil service, slash regulation, slash taxes etc.
She has generally voted the pro choice line on abortion, is pro same sex marriage and at university wanted to legalise cannabis. She also is generally more liberal on immigration than many Tories (of course initially backing Remain and continued EU free movement)
You can't point to anything remotely concrete to support your hypothesis can you?
Those are all libertarian positions, she wanted to slash the size of the state as she made clear as PM and blames the 'deep state' civil service for blocking her.
You've glibly classified Truss as an 'uber-libertarian' but failed to identify a single policy that she's pursued or currently pursuing that smacks remotely of uber-libertarianism.
That's fine, I was just curious as to whether you could substantiate your claim - it's not important.
I'm not really sure if any actual libertarians exist. It typically seems either to be a label applied by someone to a person on the right they dislike regardless of their policies, or a self label of someone who is very much in favour of state power so long as it is applied towards the things they like, or more accurately against the things they do not like.
Ever read about the New Hampsire Town taken over by Libertarians, then eaten by bears?
Iranian media is reporting that the Swiss Ambassador to Iran was summoned so that she could be warned about the consequences of a potential Israeli military strike and US involvement in such a strike.
However, the ambassador was not summoned to the foreign ministry; instead, she was summoned to the IRGC.
Summoning is a formal diplomatic tool that allows a host country to express a strong objection about a matter to a foreign diplomat.
Actually, the alternative was Mordaunt if a handful of MPs hadn't been twats.
I well remember contemplating the choice that Tories had when Boris imploded.
1. Penny Mordaunt. A risk. She, alone of all the contenders, could take the fight to Labour and keep the Tories in the game. But unclear whether she had the ability or experience to be a competent PM. But probably a risk worth taking in the circs.
2. Rishi Sunak. The "safe" choice. Man in a suit. Competent, and not likely to embarrass. But not an election-winner in difficult times.
3. Liz Truss. An obvious dud. Tin-eared. Starry-eyed. In the competition because the rightwing factionalists simply had to have a candidate no matter how unqualified. IDS in a wig.
The rest is history.
Oi! My mum voted for Truss!
LibDem, huh?
Nah, my mum has been a Tory member for about 70 years.
The most successful thing Truss did in her time as PM was attend a funeral.
Even the funeral was messed up. In order to diminish her rival, Liz Truss gave Penny Mordaunt the non-job of Leader of the House. It is hard to launch another leadership bid without a spending department to control. Truss would have been astonished to find that after HMQ died, its bundled role of Lord President of the Council meant Penny Mordaunt was front and centre of both the funeral and coronation.
I'm genuinely quite surprised at this post. I'm quite used to a fairly ugly pile on here when it comes to Truss, and this thread is one of the grimmer ones, but the idea that as she uprooted her family and adjusted them to living in Number 10, created a cabinet, and rushed to pull together a plan for growth, she was cursing herself because she hadn't calculated that Penny Mordaunt would get to walk behind a coffin, is bizarre. Not sure what it says about Truss, but it doesn't do a great deal for you. I've always found you sensible, but a lot of people here have a Truss blind spot.
I'm saying that Liz Truss was unfamiliar with the finer points of ceremonies not seen in Britain since 1952 and 53, decades before Truss was even born (in 1975). Why you should consider that a smear is beyond me.
I'm not really sure if any actual libertarians exist. It typically seems either to be a label applied by someone to a person on the right they dislike regardless of their policies, or a self label of someone who is very much in favour of state power so long as it is applied towards the things they like, or more accurately against the things they do not like.
Ever read about the New Hampsire Town taken over by Libertarians, then eaten by bears?
One thing that the Free Towners did that encouraged the bears was unintentional, in that they just threw their waste out how they wanted. They didn’t want the government to tell them how to manage their potential bear attractants.
Iranian media is reporting that the Swiss Ambassador to Iran was summoned so that she could be warned about the consequences of a potential Israeli military strike and US involvement in such a strike.
However, the ambassador was not summoned to the foreign ministry; instead, she was summoned to the IRGC.
Summoning is a formal diplomatic tool that allows a host country to express a strong objection about a matter to a foreign diplomat.
This bit of business in Brussels has spectacularly backfired. A conference nobody would have remembered in a week's time, turned into undeserved and extralegal martyrdom.
This bit of business in Brussels has spectacularly backfired. A conference nobody would have remembered in a week's time, turned into undeserved and extralegal martyrdom.
Iranian media is reporting that the Swiss Ambassador to Iran was summoned so that she could be warned about the consequences of a potential Israeli military strike and US involvement in such a strike.
However, the ambassador was not summoned to the foreign ministry; instead, she was summoned to the IRGC.
Summoning is a formal diplomatic tool that allows a host country to express a strong objection about a matter to a foreign diplomat.
As always with dictatorial regimes, it’s actually more like an oligarchy with competing power bases. The IRGC is one.
This just maybe suggests a growing political instability, though ?
While I think Barry a fool for suggesting the west attempts regime change via war - which would likely be counterproductive, as well as being highly dangerous - I’d welcome the regime falling.
Robert Peston @Peston I am told by DUP that Sunak’s smoking ban is very unlikely to apply in Northern Ireland because of the open border with the Republic and the likelihood the EU will say it is a basic right of Irish citizens of any age to buy cigarettes anywhere on the island. This seems to be an area where the Tory libertarian right would applaud Brussels
AIUI there is a justification in the form of health reasons which governments can invoke. Mr Frost (yes that one) tried to invoke EU fair market law when he took the Scottish Gmt to court, and lost, on the issue of the alcohol pricing minimum.
Possibly this would not work here. But that would mean that the Tory right would end up, erm, admitting that the UKG has lost significant sovereignty in NI.
Truss is basically an uber libertarian, probably more at home with ultra small state conservative DC think tanks than farmers in her Norfolk constituency
What uber libertarian policies has she proposed/pursued?
She is anti civil service, wants to slash taxes and the size of the state and is socially very liberal on most issues
What has pointing out institutional issues within the civil service got to do with libertarianism?
Truss's tax cuts, had they been implemented in full, would have amounted to £25 billion being left in peoples' and companies' pockets, from £1,100 billion of government receipts in 2026-27. How is that relatively modest level of tax cut, still leaving taxes at a 70 year high, 'uber-libertarian'?
But can you point to any 'uber-libertarian' social policies pursued by her?
She wants to abolish the Equality Act.
Judging by the spectacular amount of reactionary ignorant rubbish being posted by @148grss and others on the previous thread but one - all of it detrimental to the interests of women (& don't give me @Topping's "who knows what a woman is?" bollocks - men have no difficulty knowing this, especially when it comes to putting them in their place) - I am surprised she does not get more support on here.
Abolishing laws preventing discrimination against women is probably very popular amongst a certain demographic.
She's batshit insane. But then so are lots of voters.
The Tories IMO will be obliterated at the next election. So it scarcely matters who they elect as leader.
Other than for good governance, having a proper opposition to hold the government to account and so on. But who cares about any of that these days?
Good evening cyclefree. I see you didn't read all of all my posts. No matter. Perhaps you can help clear those final two points up which are: safe spaces (and sport for that matter) need to be protected but aside from this how do you know what we will know as a woman 100 years from now; and secondly please help me to understand why trans isn't the new gay.
Merchan is a pretty impressive judge. They’ve managed to seat seven jurors in the Trump trial today, which I’m slightly astonished by - and he has conducted proceedings very fairly, as well as briskly.
Con have got to find a way of getting rid of her. She'll just be the gift that keeps on giving... for Labour.
There must be something in the Conservative Party's constitution that says you can be deselected from your constituency if you're proven to be insane?
They say genius is close to madness Gin.
Yes... but unfortunately in her case she's just mad (and thick)
How on earth did the Tory members choose this to be PM? I mean, I know the alternative was Sunak and we all see how that has worked out, but jeez.
I think she is genuinely unwell.
That is an easy question to answer. While other ministers were tied down at home, Liz Truss was flying around the world signing free trade deals: triumph after triumph for post-Brexit Britain, or at least, that is how it was spun to Party members.
Yes, that's very true. But it's weird to look back at the time when Britain doing trade deals was a thing. I can't remember the last time one was even mentioned. And did Tony Abbott ever do anything? Was he even appointed in the end?
TBH I think that reading too much into what effect Truss thought her policies would have is a mistake. There seem to be increasing number of politicians for whom Westminster is just a kind of game show, the consequences for public are not relevant because in their heart of hearts they know that none of it will affect them personally. Commitment and zeal are necessary (at least for Truss) in the game, diligence and clear thinking are not.
This bit of business in Brussels has spectacularly backfired. A conference nobody would have remembered in a week's time, turned into undeserved and extralegal martyrdom.
Only immensely over entitled snowflakes would call that martyrdom. Oh, they are etc.
Merchan is a pretty impressive judge. They’ve managed to seat seven jurors in the Trump trial today, which I’m slightly astonished by - and he has conducted proceedings very fairly, as well as briskly.
Trump's goto move seems to be to call judges corrupt and conflicted and then use that call itself as evidence they must be biased, and then hope the judge will do something stupid out of irritation. Certainly he's given grounds for many judges to be even harsher with him than they have been, and his lawyers, even the decent ones, engage in lots of frivilous behaviour to also try to piss off the judges.
Any presiding judge will find their professionalism severely tested, but hopefully they are up to it - Trump as with anyone deserves a fair trial, and if he is convicted in any of them it needs to be airtight. Merchan, like the DC federal insurrection trial judge, does not appear to mess about with delay attempts (her trial would have been March, but for the Supreme Court weighing in).
This bit of business in Brussels has spectacularly backfired. A conference nobody would have remembered in a week's time, turned into undeserved and extralegal martyrdom.
Only immensely over entitled snowflakes would call that martyrdom.
But it gives them something they can use to call it that to supporters and prospective supporters. Why give that to them? Right wingers are among the biggest snowflakes, it is true, but they still need something to work off.
I'm not really sure if any actual libertarians exist. It typically seems either to be a label applied by someone to a person on the right they dislike regardless of their policies, or a self label of someone who is very much in favour of state power so long as it is applied towards the things they like, or more accurately against the things they do not like.
Ever read about the New Hampsire Town taken over by Libertarians, then eaten by bears?
One thing that the Free Towners did that encouraged the bears was unintentional, in that they just threw their waste out how they wanted. They didn’t want the government to tell them how to manage their potential bear attractants.
Damn government and their rules, man.
Also (to use an Americanism) I liked that it wasn't just the bears but the libertarians who were shitting in the woods.
I’m sure Sunak is loving the fact that Truss has eaten up another day in the news cycle.
I cannot tell if that is a genuine comment because it would distract from what would probably otherwise be poor news about or for Sunak himself, or an ironic comment because Truss news would be more damaging than a regular news day for the party.
Actually, the alternative was Mordaunt if a handful of MPs hadn't been twats.
PM4PM - What might have been... 😢
They can rue that decision as they stand by the Returning Officer.
What is all this Penny Mordaunt stuff? I mean, really.
Plenty have said she is useless, lazy, barely competent in minor ministerial positions and, OK, some of them were David Frost, but still. Truss got on and Mordaunt didn't.
So, my only question would be, how useless is she?
What if Sunak faces a confidence vote after the locals, takes enough damage from the VONC that the men in grey suits get him before he goes to the country, and Penny is the one. What then?
Does she plan her pitch for a couple of months before going to the country or does she call it on day 1? Could we take 6 weeks of her poorly prepared schtick across a range of topics at PMQs before an election was called or would she be exposed as utterly clueless before that point? If she tries being PM for a while before calling an election could she be shown up so badly that the Tory party have another 60 day coup to get rid of her? And how would that go down?
Or would it all happen on the campaign trail, too late for anything to be done? Could she be a British Kim Campbell, who rode high in the polls during the campaign but had collapsed by polling day.
At best she has the patter of a pound shop Boris, and does that float the voters' boats these days, at worst she will be so out of her depth that what transpired might be a catastrophe unthinkable even under Sunak.
And the key question remains: Exactly how useless is she?
She has big tits though and gives the torys dominatrix fantasies. Its the 2020s maybe thats good enough.
I’m sure Sunak is loving the fact that Truss has eaten up another day in the news cycle.
Two full days are small beer for a titan of TRUSS’s standing. She will want the whole week, and more. Let’s see what she has up her sleeve for tomorrow.
Aren't we over-complicating things? Truss has spent the day trying to sell more copies of her book, that's all. We can review what she's achieved in April 2034.
I’m sure Sunak is loving the fact that Truss has eaten up another day in the news cycle.
Two full days are small beer for a titan of TRUSS’s standing. She will want the whole week, and more. Let’s see what she has up her sleeve for tomorrow.
TRUSS.
She keeps THE NECKLACE up her sleeve. I think you'll find. If you look. I advise you not to.
I'm not really sure if any actual libertarians exist. It typically seems either to be a label applied by someone to a person on the right they dislike regardless of their policies, or a self label of someone who is very much in favour of state power so long as it is applied towards the things they like, or more accurately against the things they do not like.
Ever read about the New Hampsire Town taken over by Libertarians, then eaten by bears?
One thing that the Free Towners did that encouraged the bears was unintentional, in that they just threw their waste out how they wanted. They didn’t want the government to tell them how to manage their potential bear attractants.
Damn government and their rules, man.
Also (to use an Americanism) I liked that it wasn't just the bears but the libertarians who were shitting in the woods.
More precisely, I think the libertarians ended up shitting in the woods and the bears shitting in what remained of the libertarians’ gardens.
I’m sure Sunak is loving the fact that Truss has eaten up another day in the news cycle.
I cannot tell if that is a genuine comment because it would distract from what would probably otherwise be poor news about or for Sunak himself, or an ironic comment because Truss news would be more damaging than a regular news day for the party.
If a senior politician does have a drink problem as alluded to here maybe its time to lay off her for a bit and just move to ignore rather than mock, as easy and tempting as landing the cheap shots is.
I don't know if she does or not, but if it does look more that way over the next few weeks I shall try and refrain from the obvious.
Banning cigarettes via some kind of intrusive age check mechanism. Just ugh, Britain.
The country seems full of curtain-twitching killjoys.
If government wants cigarettes banned just get it over with and ban for everyone. I know why they are not doing that, but if it is so bad people should be prevented from doing it then why is it ok to continue to let people do it (legally) just because they already are?
It's a disgusting, inexplicable habit, but I'd have voted against the measure myself.
She’s quite right. But she, and I, are decidedly out of temper with the times. People want to be mollycoddled, and they want to see other people suffer privation, as we saw during the pandemic.
I'm not really sure if any actual libertarians exist. It typically seems either to be a label applied by someone to a person on the right they dislike regardless of their policies, or a self label of someone who is very much in favour of state power so long as it is applied towards the things they like, or more accurately against the things they do not like.
Ever read about the New Hampsire Town taken over by Libertarians, then eaten by bears?
One thing that the Free Towners did that encouraged the bears was unintentional, in that they just threw their waste out how they wanted. They didn’t want the government to tell them how to manage their potential bear attractants.
Damn government and their rules, man.
Also (to use an Americanism) I liked that it wasn't just the bears but the libertarians who were shitting in the woods.
More precisely, I think the libertarians ended up shitting in the woods and the bears shitting in what remained of the libertarians’ gardens.
The perfect outcome would be the bears shitting out the digested remains of the libertarians.
Banning cigarettes via some kind of intrusive age check mechanism. Just ugh, Britain.
The country seems full of curtain-twitching killjoys.
If government wants cigarettes banned just get it over with and ban for everyone. I know why they are not doing that, but if it is so bad people should be prevented from doing it then why is it ok to continue to let people do it (legally) just because they already are?
It's a disgusting, inexplicable habit, but I'd have voted against the measure myself.
I'd have voted against too. If people want to destroy themselves with cigarettes (and alcohol) that's their choice... As long as they don't mind paying a lot of tax on their habit to pay for the NHS that will eventually have to look after them, it's okay with me...
Same with weed and possibly other drugs (though I would draw the line at the Opioids)
I'm pretty liberal when it comes to social issues but quite conservative on fiscal matters... Does that make me... a... TRUSSITE? 👀
Actually, the alternative was Mordaunt if a handful of MPs hadn't been twats.
I well remember contemplating the choice that Tories had when Boris imploded.
1. Penny Mordaunt. A risk. She, alone of all the contenders, could take the fight to Labour and keep the Tories in the game. But unclear whether she had the ability or experience to be a competent PM. But probably a risk worth taking in the circs.
2. Rishi Sunak. The "safe" choice. Man in a suit. Competent, and not likely to embarrass. But not an election-winner in difficult times.
3. Liz Truss. An obvious dud. Tin-eared. Starry-eyed. In the competition because the rightwing factionalists simply had to have a candidate no matter how unqualified. IDS in a wig.
The rest is history.
the amusing thing is that it was the right's increasing obsession with culture war nonsense that pushed Mordaunt behind Truss.
Banning cigarettes via some kind of intrusive age check mechanism. Just ugh, Britain.
The country seems full of curtain-twitching killjoys.
If government wants cigarettes banned just get it over with and ban for everyone. I know why they are not doing that, but if it is so bad people should be prevented from doing it then why is it ok to continue to let people do it (legally) just because they already are?
It's a disgusting, inexplicable habit, but I'd have voted against the measure myself.
I'd have voted against too. If people want to destroy themselves with cigarettes (and alcohol) that's their choice... As long as they don't mind paying a lot of tax on their habit to pay for the NHS that will eventually have to look after them, it's okay with me...
Same with weed and possibly other drugs (though I would draw the line at the Opioids)
I'm pretty liberal when it comes to social issues but quite conservative on fiscal matters... Does that make me... a... TRUSSITE? 👀
A better approach would be a sensible, evidence-based review of all recreational drugs (legal and otherwise). Professor David Nutt did this (see chart in the BBC piece) and, because his findings were inconvenient to Blair’s government, was hounded out.
I'm not really sure if any actual libertarians exist. It typically seems either to be a label applied by someone to a person on the right they dislike regardless of their policies, or a self label of someone who is very much in favour of state power so long as it is applied towards the things they like, or more accurately against the things they do not like.
Ever read about the New Hampsire Town taken over by Libertarians, then eaten by bears?
One thing that the Free Towners did that encouraged the bears was unintentional, in that they just threw their waste out how they wanted. They didn’t want the government to tell them how to manage their potential bear attractants.
Damn government and their rules, man.
Also (to use an Americanism) I liked that it wasn't just the bears but the libertarians who were shitting in the woods.
More precisely, I think the libertarians ended up shitting in the woods and the bears shitting in what remained of the libertarians’ gardens.
The perfect outcome would be the bears shitting out the digested remains of the libertarians.
It's getting that way - bears attacking people. Not normal for Black Bears, in fact. Unless libertarian bears, obvs.
Banning cigarettes via some kind of intrusive age check mechanism. Just ugh, Britain.
The country seems full of curtain-twitching killjoys.
If government wants cigarettes banned just get it over with and ban for everyone. I know why they are not doing that, but if it is so bad people should be prevented from doing it then why is it ok to continue to let people do it (legally) just because they already are?
It's a disgusting, inexplicable habit, but I'd have voted against the measure myself.
I'd have voted against too. If people want to destroy themselves with cigarettes (and alcohol) that's their choice... As long as they don't mind paying a lot of tax on their habit to pay for the NHS that will eventually have to look after them, it's okay with me...
Same with weed and possibly other drugs (though I would draw the line at the Opioids)
I'm pretty liberal when it comes to social issues but quite conservative on fiscal matters... Does that make me... a... TRUSSITE? 👀
Banning cigarettes via some kind of intrusive age check mechanism. Just ugh, Britain.
The country seems full of curtain-twitching killjoys.
If government wants cigarettes banned just get it over with and ban for everyone. I know why they are not doing that, but if it is so bad people should be prevented from doing it then why is it ok to continue to let people do it (legally) just because they already are?
It's a disgusting, inexplicable habit, but I'd have voted against the measure myself.
I'd have voted against too. If people want to destroy themselves with cigarettes (and alcohol) that's their choice... As long as they don't mind paying a lot of tax on their habit to pay for the NHS that will eventually have to look after them, it's okay with me...
Same with weed and possibly other drugs (though I would draw the line at the Opioids)
I'm pretty liberal when it comes to social issues but quite conservative on fiscal matters... Does that make me... a... TRUSSITE? 👀
We are all Trussites now, Gin.
And so we are 👍
T
R
U
S
S
(If this is the end of me, I'll see you on the other side 🙏 )
FPT: For MattW: "In the United States, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),[1] formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, is a federal government program that provides food-purchasing assistance for low- and no-income people to help them maintain adequate nutrition and health. It is a federal aid program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) under the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), though benefits are distributed by specific departments of U.S. states (e.g., the Division of Social Services, the Department of Health and Human Services, etc.).
SNAP benefits supplied roughly 40 million Americans in 2018, at an expenditure of $57.1 billion." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplemental_Nutrition_Assistance_Program (There are other food assistance programs, but that's the largest. And there are signficant private programs, often run by churches.)
One result of all these programs is that obesity is far more common in the bottom half of the US income distribution than in the top half.
Of course other programs directed at the poor, notably Medicaid, and the Earned Income Tax Credit, make it far easier for poor people here to buy food.
(Recently, Dr. Leanna Wen, writing in the WaPo, speculated that American poor might be better off if the US subsidized their food purchases less, perhaps reducing obesity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leana_Wen She's a doctor, not a politician, which explains why she mentioned this. She's smart, so she hasn't come back to her suggestion.)
The current US debate about providing additional military assistance to Ukraine is based in part on the assumption that the war will remain stalemated regardless of US actions. That assumption is false. Russian advances will accelerate absent urgent American action.
Comments
Jerusalem Post: The IDF chief of staff "hinted that the timing of the attack was not very imminent during a visit to the Arrow air defense battery of Battalion 136. He said, 'We are enabling a home front policy to at least give citizens this Passover week to live almost like normal because we completely trust you and your readiness.'" [Note: Passover runs from April 22 to April 30.]
https://jpost.com/breaking-news/article-797445
https://x.com/lookner/status/1780328547741020475
Not as confusing for first time viewers of Law & Order or a Trump trial in discovering that New York has a Supreme Court which is not the court of last resort.
Can you imagine TRUSS at 7am doing a TV workout? 😂
She has generally voted the pro choice line on abortion, is pro same sex marriage and at university wanted to legalise cannabis. She also is generally more liberal on immigration than many Tories (of course initially backing Remain and continued EU free movement)
Thanks, I hope Penny holds on against UNS.
Plenty have said she is useless, lazy, barely competent in minor ministerial positions and, OK, some of them were David Frost, but still. Truss got on and Mordaunt didn't.
So, my only question would be, how useless is she?
What if Sunak faces a confidence vote after the locals, takes enough damage from the VONC that the men in grey suits get him before he goes to the country, and Penny is the one. What then?
Does she plan her pitch for a couple of months before going to the country or does she call it on day 1? Could we take 6 weeks of her poorly prepared schtick across a range of topics at PMQs before an election was called or would she be exposed as utterly clueless before that point? If she tries being PM for a while before calling an election could she be shown up so badly that the Tory party have another 60 day coup to get rid of her? And how would that go down?
Or would it all happen on the campaign trail, too late for anything to be done? Could she be a British Kim Campbell, who rode high in the polls during the campaign but had collapsed by polling day.
At best she has the patter of a pound shop Boris, and does that float the voters' boats these days, at worst she will be so out of her depth that what transpired might be a catastrophe unthinkable even under Sunak.
And the key question remains: Exactly how useless is she?
She is the all-seeing.
Even her championing of allowing people to freely smoke is libertarian
https://conservativehome.com/2024/04/16/andrew-gimsons-commons-sketch-truss-is-not-amused-by-the-tobacco-bill-which-infantilises-people/
PS Passover ends on 29 April in Israel, 30 April elsewhere.
The case doesn't sit Wednesday. May have a trial jury by Friday. (If not, Passover start of next week so the trial - and jury selection - doesn't resume until Thursday next week.)
If she decides she wants to Do Something Big first, it won't be mere theatrics at PMQ - it will be something that's sold as megatoughly ballsome against boats and immigrants. If I'm right, this has already been planned.
Judging by the spectacular amount of reactionary ignorant rubbish being posted by @148grss and others on the previous thread but one - all of it detrimental to the interests of women (& don't give me @Topping's "who knows what a woman is?" bollocks - men have no difficulty knowing this, especially when it comes to putting them in their place) - I am surprised she does not get more support on here.
Abolishing laws preventing discrimination against women is probably very popular amongst a certain demographic.
She's batshit insane. But then so are lots of voters.
The Tories IMO will be obliterated at the next election. So it scarcely matters who they elect as leader.
Other than for good governance, having a proper opposition to hold the government to account and so on. But who cares about any of that these days?
You've glibly classified Truss as an 'uber-libertarian' but failed to identify a single policy that she's pursued or currently pursuing that smacks remotely of uber-libertarianism.
That's fine, I was just curious as to whether you could substantiate your claim - it's not important.
Puffy face, put on weight, slightly slurred, unkempt hair. The last 18 months has not been kind to her.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/non-fiction/ten-years-to-save-the-west-review-liz-truss-memoir/
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling
This is incredibly unusual…
Iranian media is reporting that the Swiss Ambassador to Iran was summoned so that she could be warned about the consequences of a potential Israeli military strike and US involvement in such a strike.
However, the ambassador was not summoned to the foreign ministry; instead, she was summoned to the IRGC.
Summoning is a formal diplomatic tool that allows a host country to express a strong objection about a matter to a foreign diplomat.
I don't remember when a foreign diplomat in any country was summoned anywhere else but the host country's foreign ministry, much less the IRGC.
https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1780319449494806724
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/truss-turns-on-foes-at-book-bash/
One thing that the Free Towners did that encouraged the bears was unintentional, in that they just threw their waste out how they wanted. They didn’t want the government to tell them how to manage their potential bear attractants.
Damn government and their rules, man.
While I think Barry a fool for suggesting the west attempts regime change via war - which would likely be counterproductive, as well as being highly dangerous - I’d welcome the regime falling.
In 2015 there was a similar discussion around the Lib Dem vote change - absolute or proportion decline. Proportional change resulted in lower seats.
Alastair sets out the logic for the Conservative slump this time.
Possibly this would not work here. But that would mean that the Tory right would end up, erm, admitting that the UKG has lost significant sovereignty in NI.
TIA
They’ve managed to seat seven jurors in the Trump trial today, which I’m slightly astonished by - and he has conducted proceedings very fairly, as well as briskly.
Oh, they are etc.
Any presiding judge will find their professionalism severely tested, but hopefully they are up to it - Trump as with anyone deserves a fair trial, and if he is convicted in any of them it needs to be airtight. Merchan, like the DC federal insurrection trial judge, does not appear to mess about with delay attempts (her trial would have been March, but for the Supreme Court weighing in).
"It looks like you're trying to write a plan for Growth!"
And then just a vapid spinning cursor when you click "Yes!".
TRUSS.
Truss has spent the day trying to sell more copies of her book, that's all.
We can review what she's achieved in April 2034.
The country seems full of curtain-twitching killjoys.
I don't know if she does or not, but if it does look more that way over the next few weeks I shall try and refrain from the obvious.
https://x.com/trussliz/status/1780283856639099158
It's a disgusting, inexplicable habit, but I'd have voted against the measure myself.
But she, and I, are decidedly out of temper with the times. People want to be mollycoddled, and they want to see other people suffer privation, as we saw during the pandemic.
Sadly it’s been noticed by do-gooders at the MoH and eagerly picked up by Rishi Sunak who has never experienced a single moment of personal debauch.
The man is a kind of eunuch.
Same with weed and possibly other drugs (though I would draw the line at the Opioids)
I'm pretty liberal when it comes to social issues but quite conservative on fiscal matters... Does that make me... a... TRUSSITE? 👀
Blair’s government, was hounded out.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210?ictd[master]=vid~9527eafd-ae9b-44ad-aa2e-7077a855d044
https://www.vice.com/en/article/4w8j93/david-nutt-magic-mushrooms-interview
It is, seriously, a good read.
So much for them.
Why are governments so obsessed with banning things ?
5 LDs voted for it, the remainder abstained.
T
R
U
S
S
(If this is the end of me, I'll see you on the other side 🙏 )
SNAP benefits supplied roughly 40 million Americans in 2018, at an expenditure of $57.1 billion."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplemental_Nutrition_Assistance_Program
(There are other food assistance programs, but that's the largest. And there are signficant private programs, often run by churches.)
One result of all these programs is that obesity is far more common in the bottom half of the US income distribution than in the top half.
Of course other programs directed at the poor, notably Medicaid, and the Earned Income Tax Credit, make it far easier for poor people here to buy food.
(Recently, Dr. Leanna Wen, writing in the WaPo, speculated that American poor might be better off if the US subsidized their food purchases less, perhaps reducing obesity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leana_Wen
She's a doctor, not a politician, which explains why she mentioned this. She's smart, so she hasn't come back to her suggestion.)
https://www.samdumitriu.com/p/homes-or-golf
Another thing NZ has done is to legalise home distillation.
https://x.com/thestudyofwar/status/1780264953548570818
The current US debate about providing additional military assistance to Ukraine is based in part on the assumption that the war will remain stalemated regardless of US actions. That assumption is false. Russian advances will accelerate absent urgent American action.