Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
You still avowedly believe in the wet market. You’re beyond fantasy. You’re a deluded imbecile
Indeed you’re so imbecilic you try and claim “the science is settled”. The consensus, according to you, is “the lab leak hypothesis is absurd”. Have you ever asked yourself how you’ve arrived at these terrifyingly stupid intellectual dead ends? That maybe you are the one with mental issues?
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
"Fantasist" means someone who does not realise that they cannot alter reality to fit their mental model and seems an odd attack line against someone who is likely to be the most powerful human being in the world come January.
Too many people are pining for a world in which US power absolves them of the need to think about anything in a serious way. Not every question can be reduced to good guys vs bad guys.
Many people on PB have serious discussions about many things on a daily basis. However, there are a few who aren't very serious, who make ludicrous suggestions like saying Trump/Vance won't be a disaster for Ukraine. I wonder why they bother posting such nonsense.
“This story keeps getting more bizarre. CNN is reporting Crooks bought 50 rounds of ammo, a 12' ladder from Home Depot and walked a mile to the rally with his father's AR-15, the ammo, and the ladder in tow. Nobody noticed him or stopped him?”
King's Speech to include cracking down on shoplifters.
Good start from Starmer. ✅
Down with that sort of thing, sure, but it seems a pretty pathetic thing to be trailing from a 30+ bill kings speech, and curiously retro and conservative. Shops belong to the petit bourgeoisie or to rentier Tesco shareholders.
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
"Fantasist" means someone who does not realise that they cannot alter reality to fit their mental model and seems an odd attack line against someone who is likely to be the most powerful human being in the world come January.
Trump may have much power come January, but no amount of power can change some aspects of reality. Everyone in the GOP may be required to say Trump really won in 2020, but he didn't. Vance saying the Labour government is run by Islamists doesn't make it so.
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
Because Trump was right when he told Europe to increase defence spending and to reduce reliance on Russian energy.
Europe would have been in a better situation if it had done so.
You don't have to support Trump or think that he cared about anyone other than himself when he said that.
From the Telegraph. An example of why the government is near bankrupt
"Currently, state schools must automatically enrol their teaching staff in the TPS. Teachers pay in between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary, with a further 28.68pc added by their employer. Each year, these contributions receive a boost equal to inflation plus 1.6pc. When they retire, the final pot is used to provide a set pension for life, which also rises annually with inflation."
28.68% employers' contribution to the pension? How can we possibly afford to employ more teachers on such terms?
But I will tell you a thing. 7 or 8 years ago the pension scheme I am a trustee of had a deficit of around £5m. Quite a lot for a relatively small scheme (it is for the employees not the members). Today it is in surplus to the tune of around £10m. We have paid no contributions at all into the scheme (it closed about 8 years ago), for the last 4 years.
We have made some good investment decisions and have been fortunate but the biggest single factor, by an order of magnitude, has been the increase in gilt yields. To pay a final salary pension you need to buy enough gilts to generate the income. When gilts are under 1% that is a lot of gilts. When they are at 4% you need roughly 1/4 of the capital to pay the same income.
So, it is entirely understandable that those state funded pension schemes like the teachers were in dire straits in the aftermath of the GFC. It is rather harder to see why it is so bad now. There must surely be room for some serious cuts in the employer's contributions on funded schemes. I suspect that there is some "catch up" to eliminate the deficits that accrued but we really should be through this.
Interestingly, there is currently an Academy trust suggesting that they might address the issue of teacher recruitment by allowing their teachers to take some of that in income rather than pension. Just as an option. Predictably, the teaching unions are going absolutely ape shit.
“This story keeps getting more bizarre. CNN is reporting Crooks bought 50 rounds of ammo, a 12' ladder from Home Depot and walked a mile to the rally with his father's AR-15, the ammo, and the ladder in tow. Nobody noticed him or stopped him?”
“This story keeps getting more bizarre. CNN is reporting Crooks bought 50 rounds of ammo, a 12' ladder from Home Depot and walked a mile to the rally with his father's AR-15, the ammo, and the ladder in tow. Nobody noticed him or stopped him?”
Pennsylvania is an open carry without a specific open carry license state.
A dude could wander into a McDonalds there with an AR15 slung over his shoulder and it would be normal.
Not saying this happens all the time, but it happens enough that 'hey, that dude's wandering round with an ar-15 over his shoulder' wouldn't be the WTF it would be in most other places around the world.
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
I think it would be a great thing.
But I doubt many going to see the doctor want to be lectured on global warming.
Not least because we're continually told that doctors don't have enough time to see all their patients.
And, forgive me for being cynical, I wonder if we'll see yet more admin and 'targets' to see if doctors are doing what is deemed necessary for a 'net zero NHS'.
If you bother reading the actual RCP report it is mostly about reducing wastage, and also flagging up those most at risk from increasingly frequent and severe adverse weather events such as heatwaves.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
Because Trump was right when he told Europe to increase defence spending and to reduce reliance on Russian energy.
Europe would have been in a better situation if it had done so.
You don't have to support Trump or think that he cared about anyone other than himself when he said that.
But he has been proven correct.
A stopped clock is right twice a day. The point is that you keep going out of your way to praise Trump and you keep ducking commenting on, for example, Vance's ridiculous words.
I suspect that if Trump said that Europe should CUT defence spending we would have PBers and politicians immediately changing their mind and demanding increases in defence spending.
Interesting. Top of the pile for Starmer and European members of NATO. It is not impossible that within 12 months it will be clear that USA has no intention of supporting Europe. This is loads more important than the EU or Brexit.
A couple of clear possibilities: UK and France (if it can avoid going nuts) are the most important players by miles. Expect Europe to start being nicer to us.
If USA is not 100% clear about NATO commitments, then Russia will test this out. (Baltic states, Poland) At that point we are in 1940 territory.
We all discover that the EU is a trade association with a flag not a country, and compared with NATO a triviality with fewer brigades than the pope.
There is currently no defence plan B beyond NATO with USA at the centre.
Our best hope would be that for Trump the NATO thing is a negotiating tactic rather than actual isolationism.
Long shot within 3 years: Farage offered job in defence ministry (and declines?)
Hardly.
Putin has lost half a million men to take a few bombed out colliery towns, not to mention a vast share of his best equipment. If he invaded a NATO country his arse would be handed to him very quickly…
Did you read the thread ?
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
If what remains of NATO hesitates to respond with assistance, then the eastern border states start thinking about making accommodations with Russia.
It’s not a prediction of what will happen; rather something that becomes a dangerous possibility. Especially if Trump withdraws assistance to Ukraine.
We don't have very long to think about it - and European re-armament is on a much slower timetable.
(But I agree that the Farage suggestion is fairly daft.)
From the Telegraph. An example of why the government is near bankrupt
"Currently, state schools must automatically enrol their teaching staff in the TPS. Teachers pay in between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary, with a further 28.68pc added by their employer. Each year, these contributions receive a boost equal to inflation plus 1.6pc. When they retire, the final pot is used to provide a set pension for life, which also rises annually with inflation."
28.68% employers' contribution to the pension? How can we possibly afford to employ more teachers on such terms?
But I will tell you a thing. 7 or 8 years ago the pension scheme I am a trustee of had a deficit of around £5m. Quite a lot for a relatively small scheme (it is for the employees not the members). Today it is in surplus to the tune of around £10m. We have paid no contributions at all into the scheme (it closed about 8 years ago), for the last 4 years.
We have made some good investment decisions and have been fortunate but the biggest single factor, by an order of magnitude, has been the increase in gilt yields. To pay a final salary pension you need to buy enough gilts to generate the income. When gilts are under 1% that is a lot of gilts. When they are at 4% you need roughly 1/4 of the capital to pay the same income.
So, it is entirely understandable that those state funded pension schemes like the teachers were in dire straits in the aftermath of the GFC. It is rather harder to see why it is so bad now. There must surely be room for some serious cuts in the employer's contributions on funded schemes. I suspect that there is some "catch up" to eliminate the deficits that accrued but we really should be through this.
Interestingly, there is currently an Academy trust suggesting that they might address the issue of teacher recruitment by allowing their teachers to take some of that in income rather than pension. Just as an option. Predictably, the teaching unions are going absolutely ape shit.
Plenty of people would take more salary so long as they could guarantee a pension of, say £25k per year including state pension. Use the money to pay off the house sooner, savings for pre-retirement rainy days and so on.
Of course, some people would opt out of the whole thing, waste it all, and then claim pension credit and housing benefit.
“This story keeps getting more bizarre. CNN is reporting Crooks bought 50 rounds of ammo, a 12' ladder from Home Depot and walked a mile to the rally with his father's AR-15, the ammo, and the ladder in tow. Nobody noticed him or stopped him?”
You should get out more. I sense you are a stay at home soul who hasn't travelled much, but honestly a first-time visit to the States would repay the effort. You do realise you can buy literal ammunition at literal Walmart (their Tesco) over there? The walking more than 10 feet vs taking the F150 is the only credibility stretcher in your report.
“This story keeps getting more bizarre. CNN is reporting Crooks bought 50 rounds of ammo, a 12' ladder from Home Depot and walked a mile to the rally with his father's AR-15, the ammo, and the ladder in tow. Nobody noticed him or stopped him?”
Pennsylvania is an open carry without a specific open carry license state.
A dude could wander into a McDonalds there with an AR15 slung over his shoulder and it would be normal.
Not saying this happens all the time, but it happens enough that 'hey, that dude's wandering round with an ar-15 over his shoulder' wouldn't be the WTF it would be in most other places around the world.
Sure. But when you add it to everything else
Like the fact the shooter was spotted 30 minutes before the shooting. On the roof. By anxious rally goers. Who told the police.
Like the fact that 2 minutes before the shooting they knew he had a gun and was aiming. And they didn’t warn Trump
Like the fact the roof the shooter used was left deliberately vacant because the seekyservs apparently felt the sloped roof was dangerous for agents even tho they had agents on other steeper roofs
Like the fact that they deliberately excised the most obvious location from which to shoot Trump - that roof - from the operable perimeter
Like the fact that the shooter is the only person in the universe with no internet presence
Like the fact that a cop actually confronted Crooks on the roof a few minutes before the shooting, and was menaced; and backed down; and still they didn’t warn Trump
Too many people are pining for a world in which US power absolves them of the need to think about anything in a serious way. Not every question can be reduced to good guys vs bad guys.
No, they are worrying about a world where the US might effectively abandon an alliance of many decades, almost overnight.
You’re suggesting that’s not something to be concerned about.
“This story keeps getting more bizarre. CNN is reporting Crooks bought 50 rounds of ammo, a 12' ladder from Home Depot and walked a mile to the rally with his father's AR-15, the ammo, and the ladder in tow. Nobody noticed him or stopped him?”
You should get out more. I sense you are a stay at home soul who hasn't travelled much, but honestly a first-time visit to the States would repay the effort. You do realise you can buy literal ammunition at literal Walmart (their Tesco) over there? The walking more than 10 feet vs taking the F150 is the only credibility stretcher in your report.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
Because Trump was right when he told Europe to increase defence spending and to reduce reliance on Russian energy.
Europe would have been in a better situation if it had done so.
You don't have to support Trump or think that he cared about anyone other than himself when he said that.
But he has been proven correct.
A stopped clock is right twice a day. The point is that you keep going out of your way to praise Trump and you keep ducking commenting on, for example, Vance's ridiculous words.
Where have I praised Trump ?
He's a law flouting narcissist who only cares about himself.
While Vance is a posturing loud mouth who spouts what he think his audience wants to hear.
But Trump was correct that Europe needed to increase defence spending and reduce reliance on Russian energy.
He may have been correct by accident or for his own self-serving reasons but correct he still was.
And Trump has an ego, which others might pander to for their own benefit - its what Vance has done after all.
So pander to Trump's ego by telling him he was right - he'd love that and something might be got in return.
Now that might be distasteful to many but European governments have done likewise many times before.
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
The rub is identifying "unnecessary", and whether a business case exists to justify such a move. The last thing we need is innumerate senior management looking for easy deductions behaving like lobotomised neo-Thatcherites or (to quote the Times) "Marxists".
If you take diabetes, 90% of the money (£10bn a year ish?) spent goes on treatment of complications.
There are normal blood tests and various others every year, and eg CGM (continuous glucose monitorin - as used by eg Theresa May from 2016) has been rolled out *far* more extensively in the last decade. The blood tests are not cheap - my CGM monitor costs at BNP prices approximately £900 per annum; but that is cheap compared to potential costs of complications.
It's the same with eg the Diabetes Prevention Programme, which addresses Type II and has been running for nearly a decade. The evidence currently (@Foxy may have better data) is that it reduces progression to Type II diabetes amongst pre-diabetics by 20%.
All of that - including currently rolling out Insulin Pumps to essentially all Type I Diabetics - has got past the NICE financial tests, which are not mild.
Get rid of prevention structures, and it will be like Rishi - spending investments for the future on revenue now.
Yes, both CGM and the Diabetes Prevention Programme are good examples of smallish costs that save a lot of admissions and complications down the line.
Virtually all my Type 1 patients love the data and control that their CGM gives them, and nearly all have much better control. It is also very psychologically good for them. The closed loop systems even more so.
I think psychological aspects of diabetes are underestimated by most practitioners. The root cause of poor control amongst my patients is in their heads. I have patients in denial, in depression, with eating disorders, with anger management issues and substance abuse. It's a tough condition to live with and people do not get a holiday from it. Psychological support and empowerment via CGM can really put some of my patients back in control of their lives.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia?
I don't think most of Europe would listen to such an instruction - unless forced by eg secret kill switches exist.
Would we refrain from using F35s if Mr Chump or Mr Vance said so when we were under attack? Not on your nelly.
I suspect that if Trump said that Europe should CUT defence spending we would have PBers and politicians immediately changing their mind and demanding increases in defence spending.
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
You still avowedly believe in the wet market. You’re beyond fantasy. You’re a deluded imbecile
Indeed you’re so imbecilic you try and claim “the science is settled”. The consensus, according to you, is “the lab leak hypothesis is absurd”. Have you ever asked yourself how you’ve arrived at these terrifyingly stupid intellectual dead ends? That maybe you are the one with mental issues?
Vance is one of Thiel’s acolytes. I won’t say what I know about Thiel because he could outspend me in a court of law
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Do you think that another 4 years of Biden's policy of giving Ukraine just enough to keep the front line roughly where it is but not enough to defeat Russia would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
Because Trump was right when he told Europe to increase defence spending and to reduce reliance on Russian energy.
Europe would have been in a better situation if it had done so.
You don't have to support Trump or think that he cared about anyone other than himself when he said that.
But he has been proven correct.
A stopped clock is right twice a day. The point is that you keep going out of your way to praise Trump and you keep ducking commenting on, for example, Vance's ridiculous words.
Where have I praised Trump ?
He's a law flouting narcissist who only cares about himself.
While Vance is a posturing loud mouth who spouts what he think his audience wants to hear.
But Trump was correct that Europe needed to increase defence spending and reduce reliance on Russian energy.
He may have been correct by accident or for his own self-serving reasons but correct he still was.
And Trump has an ego, which others might pander to for their own benefit - its what Vance has done after all.
So pander to Trump's ego by telling him he was right - he'd love that and something might be got in return.
Now that might be distasteful to many but European governments have done likewise many times before.
Great. Why couldn't you have said that to begin with? Why did I have to drag it out of you?
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Do you think that another 4 years of Biden's policy of giving Ukraine just enough to keep the front line roughly where it is but not enough to defeat Russia would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think 4 years of Trump/Vance not giving Ukraine anything and supporting Putin's annexation of territory would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
I think it would be a great thing.
But I doubt many going to see the doctor want to be lectured on global warming.
Not least because we're continually told that doctors don't have enough time to see all their patients.
And, forgive me for being cynical, I wonder if we'll see yet more admin and 'targets' to see if doctors are doing what is deemed necessary for a 'net zero NHS'.
If you bother reading the actual RCP report it is mostly about reducing wastage, and also flagging up those most at risk from increasingly frequent and severe adverse weather events such as heatwaves.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
The outrage bus ? Thats's not my destination.
I know full well what bus I was on - it was the cynical one
Anyway I would guess that the reduction in winter freezing more than makes up for any increase in summer heatwaves as a health factor.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
As a general observation, you "tend to believe" a load of old bollocks.
I suspect that if Trump said that Europe should CUT defence spending we would have PBers and politicians immediately changing their mind and demanding increases in defence spending.
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
I think it would be a great thing.
But I doubt many going to see the doctor want to be lectured on global warming.
Not least because we're continually told that doctors don't have enough time to see all their patients.
And, forgive me for being cynical, I wonder if we'll see yet more admin and 'targets' to see if doctors are doing what is deemed necessary for a 'net zero NHS'.
If you bother reading the actual RCP report it is mostly about reducing wastage, and also flagging up those most at risk from increasingly frequent and severe adverse weather events such as heatwaves.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
The outrage bus ? Thats's not my destination.
I know full well what bus I was on - it was the cynical one
Anyway I would guess that the reduction in winter freezing more than makes up for any increase in summer heatwaves as a health factor.
One of the things that is often overlooked - winter cold kills more than summer heat, certainly for the U.K.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
As a general observation, you "tend to believe" a load of old bollocks.
And yet I am uncannily right nearly all the time. How weird
From the Telegraph. An example of why the government is near bankrupt
"Currently, state schools must automatically enrol their teaching staff in the TPS. Teachers pay in between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary, with a further 28.68pc added by their employer. Each year, these contributions receive a boost equal to inflation plus 1.6pc. When they retire, the final pot is used to provide a set pension for life, which also rises annually with inflation."
28.68% employers' contribution to the pension? How can we possibly afford to employ more teachers on such terms?
But I will tell you a thing. 7 or 8 years ago the pension scheme I am a trustee of had a deficit of around £5m. Quite a lot for a relatively small scheme (it is for the employees not the members). Today it is in surplus to the tune of around £10m. We have paid no contributions at all into the scheme (it closed about 8 years ago), for the last 4 years.
We have made some good investment decisions and have been fortunate but the biggest single factor, by an order of magnitude, has been the increase in gilt yields. To pay a final salary pension you need to buy enough gilts to generate the income. When gilts are under 1% that is a lot of gilts. When they are at 4% you need roughly 1/4 of the capital to pay the same income.
So, it is entirely understandable that those state funded pension schemes like the teachers were in dire straits in the aftermath of the GFC. It is rather harder to see why it is so bad now. There must surely be room for some serious cuts in the employer's contributions on funded schemes. I suspect that there is some "catch up" to eliminate the deficits that accrued but we really should be through this.
Interestingly, there is currently an Academy trust suggesting that they might address the issue of teacher recruitment by allowing their teachers to take some of that in income rather than pension. Just as an option. Predictably, the teaching unions are going absolutely ape shit.
It's not a money purchase scheme is it, so the increased contribution is probably to pay for already retired teachers on final salary pensions who've burnt through their contributions due to low interest rates and living longer than anticipated. The current teachers to whom these contributions are supposedly allocated will be on much worse average salary pensions.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Do you think that another 4 years of Biden's policy of giving Ukraine just enough to keep the front line roughly where it is but not enough to defeat Russia would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think 4 years of Trump/Vance not giving Ukraine anything and supporting Putin's annexation of territory would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think that the US is electing a world dictator and Trump would coerce every other potential ally of Ukraine into doing nothing to help?
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
As a general observation, you "tend to believe" a load of old bollocks.
And yet I am uncannily right nearly all the time. How weird
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
You still avowedly believe in the wet market. You’re beyond fantasy. You’re a deluded imbecile
Indeed you’re so imbecilic you try and claim “the science is settled”. The consensus, according to you, is “the lab leak hypothesis is absurd”. Have you ever asked yourself how you’ve arrived at these terrifyingly stupid intellectual dead ends? That maybe you are the one with mental issues?
Vance is one of Thiel’s acolytes. I won’t say what I know about Thiel because he could outspend me in a court of law
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
Step away from the conspiracy sir, step away. Real life isn’t always like airport potboiler scripts. Sometimes the lone idiot gets lucky.
From the Telegraph. An example of why the government is near bankrupt
"Currently, state schools must automatically enrol their teaching staff in the TPS. Teachers pay in between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary, with a further 28.68pc added by their employer. Each year, these contributions receive a boost equal to inflation plus 1.6pc. When they retire, the final pot is used to provide a set pension for life, which also rises annually with inflation."
28.68% employers' contribution to the pension? How can we possibly afford to employ more teachers on such terms?
But I will tell you a thing. 7 or 8 years ago the pension scheme I am a trustee of had a deficit of around £5m. Quite a lot for a relatively small scheme (it is for the employees not the members). Today it is in surplus to the tune of around £10m. We have paid no contributions at all into the scheme (it closed about 8 years ago), for the last 4 years.
We have made some good investment decisions and have been fortunate but the biggest single factor, by an order of magnitude, has been the increase in gilt yields. To pay a final salary pension you need to buy enough gilts to generate the income. When gilts are under 1% that is a lot of gilts. When they are at 4% you need roughly 1/4 of the capital to pay the same income.
So, it is entirely understandable that those state funded pension schemes like the teachers were in dire straits in the aftermath of the GFC. It is rather harder to see why it is so bad now. There must surely be room for some serious cuts in the employer's contributions on funded schemes. I suspect that there is some "catch up" to eliminate the deficits that accrued but we really should be through this.
Interestingly, there is currently an Academy trust suggesting that they might address the issue of teacher recruitment by allowing their teachers to take some of that in income rather than pension. Just as an option. Predictably, the teaching unions are going absolutely ape shit.
It's not a money purchase scheme is it, so the increased contribution is probably to pay for already retired teachers on final salary pensions who've burnt through their contributions due to low interest rates and living longer than anticipated. The current teachers to whom these contributions are supposedly allocated will be on much worse average salary pensions.
I think it is basically a money purchase scheme for new teachers nowadays?
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
As a general observation, you "tend to believe" a load of old bollocks.
And yet I am uncannily right nearly all the time. How weird
You are rather like my next door neighbour and his gambling. He always tells me about his wins. Never his loses.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Do you think that another 4 years of Biden's policy of giving Ukraine just enough to keep the front line roughly where it is but not enough to defeat Russia would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think 4 years of Trump/Vance not giving Ukraine anything and supporting Putin's annexation of territory would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think that the US is electing a world dictator and Trump would coerce every other potential ally of Ukraine into doing nothing to help?
That's your best non sequitur of the day. Biden has and will do more for Ukraine than Trump/Vance. The Ukrainians know that. The Americans know that. Most of us here know that. You keep denying it. Why?
From the Telegraph. An example of why the government is near bankrupt
"Currently, state schools must automatically enrol their teaching staff in the TPS. Teachers pay in between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary, with a further 28.68pc added by their employer. Each year, these contributions receive a boost equal to inflation plus 1.6pc. When they retire, the final pot is used to provide a set pension for life, which also rises annually with inflation."
28.68% employers' contribution to the pension? How can we possibly afford to employ more teachers on such terms?
But I will tell you a thing. 7 or 8 years ago the pension scheme I am a trustee of had a deficit of around £5m. Quite a lot for a relatively small scheme (it is for the employees not the members). Today it is in surplus to the tune of around £10m. We have paid no contributions at all into the scheme (it closed about 8 years ago), for the last 4 years.
We have made some good investment decisions and have been fortunate but the biggest single factor, by an order of magnitude, has been the increase in gilt yields. To pay a final salary pension you need to buy enough gilts to generate the income. When gilts are under 1% that is a lot of gilts. When they are at 4% you need roughly 1/4 of the capital to pay the same income.
So, it is entirely understandable that those state funded pension schemes like the teachers were in dire straits in the aftermath of the GFC. It is rather harder to see why it is so bad now. There must surely be room for some serious cuts in the employer's contributions on funded schemes. I suspect that there is some "catch up" to eliminate the deficits that accrued but we really should be through this.
The TPS owns no assets: It is a defined benefit scheme wholly owned & backed by the government. Current pension payments are used to pay out existing pensions, with any future shortfall being backed by the promise to pay the difference by the UK government.
(I may have this wrong? But reading the accounts that seems to be the position - the TPS is a Resource Annually Managed Expenditure of the UK government. Not a trust or an entity that holds assets, except in the short term. Any deficit / profit is an accounting number.)
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Do you think that another 4 years of Biden's policy of giving Ukraine just enough to keep the front line roughly where it is but not enough to defeat Russia would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think 4 years of Trump/Vance not giving Ukraine anything and supporting Putin's annexation of territory would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think that the US is electing a world dictator and Trump would coerce every other potential ally of Ukraine into doing nothing to help?
That's your best non sequitur of the day. Biden has and will do more for Ukraine than Trump/Vance. The Ukrainians know that. The Americans know that. Most of us here know that. You keep denying it. Why?
You are in denial about the fact that Biden has also done negative things for Ukriane, both in terms of errors of omission and errors of commission.
He failed to deter Russia from invading in the first place (having met Putin in a summit meeting) and he actively prevented Ukraine from retaliating against Russian targets inside Russian territory out of fear of escalation.
Maybe Biden was right and he made every call perfectly and the situation today is as good as it could possibly have been for Ukraine, but I seriously doubt it.
From the Telegraph. An example of why the government is near bankrupt
"Currently, state schools must automatically enrol their teaching staff in the TPS. Teachers pay in between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary, with a further 28.68pc added by their employer. Each year, these contributions receive a boost equal to inflation plus 1.6pc. When they retire, the final pot is used to provide a set pension for life, which also rises annually with inflation."
28.68% employers' contribution to the pension? How can we possibly afford to employ more teachers on such terms?
But I will tell you a thing. 7 or 8 years ago the pension scheme I am a trustee of had a deficit of around £5m. Quite a lot for a relatively small scheme (it is for the employees not the members). Today it is in surplus to the tune of around £10m. We have paid no contributions at all into the scheme (it closed about 8 years ago), for the last 4 years.
We have made some good investment decisions and have been fortunate but the biggest single factor, by an order of magnitude, has been the increase in gilt yields. To pay a final salary pension you need to buy enough gilts to generate the income. When gilts are under 1% that is a lot of gilts. When they are at 4% you need roughly 1/4 of the capital to pay the same income.
So, it is entirely understandable that those state funded pension schemes like the teachers were in dire straits in the aftermath of the GFC. It is rather harder to see why it is so bad now. There must surely be room for some serious cuts in the employer's contributions on funded schemes. I suspect that there is some "catch up" to eliminate the deficits that accrued but we really should be through this.
Interestingly, there is currently an Academy trust suggesting that they might address the issue of teacher recruitment by allowing their teachers to take some of that in income rather than pension. Just as an option. Predictably, the teaching unions are going absolutely ape shit.
It's not a money purchase scheme is it, so the increased contribution is probably to pay for already retired teachers on final salary pensions who've burnt through their contributions due to low interest rates and living longer than anticipated. The current teachers to whom these contributions are supposedly allocated will be on much worse average salary pensions.
Incidentally, if you want a bigger teacher recruitment crisis you could reduce their pensions but then you'll have no new teachers and potentially a massive pension deficit to cover as contributions dry up. You'll still have to pay the current pension liabilities in full because the courts have set that precedent several times now, inc for teachers.
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
The rub is identifying "unnecessary", and whether a business case exists to justify such a move. The last thing we need is innumerate senior management looking for easy deductions behaving like lobotomised neo-Thatcherites or (to quote the Times) "Marxists".
If you take diabetes, 90% of the money (£10bn a year ish?) spent goes on treatment of complications.
There are normal blood tests and various others every year, and eg CGM (continuous glucose monitorin - as used by eg Theresa May from 2016) has been rolled out *far* more extensively in the last decade. The blood tests are not cheap - my CGM monitor costs at BNP prices approximately £900 per annum; but that is cheap compared to potential costs of complications.
It's the same with eg the Diabetes Prevention Programme, which addresses Type II and has been running for nearly a decade. The evidence currently (@Foxy may have better data) is that it reduces progression to Type II diabetes amongst pre-diabetics by 20%.
All of that - including currently rolling out Insulin Pumps to essentially all Type I Diabetics - has got past the NICE financial tests, which are not mild.
Get rid of prevention structures, and it will be like Rishi - spending investments for the future on revenue now.
Yes, both CGM and the Diabetes Prevention Programme are good examples of smallish costs that save a lot of admissions and complications down the line.
Virtually all my Type 1 patients love the data and control that their CGM gives them, and nearly all have much better control. It is also very psychologically good for them. The closed loop systems even more so.
I think psychological aspects of diabetes are underestimated by most practitioners. The root cause of poor control amongst my patients is in their heads. I have patients in denial, in depression, with eating disorders, with anger management issues and substance abuse. It's a tough condition to live with and people do not get a holiday from it. Psychological support and empowerment via CGM can really put some of my patients back in control of their lives.
It is a pain in the arse and the worst thing is that if you really go for it, get your weight down, do your 10,000 steps and eat well (low carb) it works for a while, then your pancreas gives out a bit more a few months later and you are back to square one. At which point you think Fuck it and stuff yourself with doughnuts as you feel you can't win either way (type 2).
CGM would be nice but they don't prescribe it for type 2 (so £100 a month to buy) In fact I was several years in before they prescribed test strips. Had been buying them for years on amazon before that. Heaven knows how people are supposed to monitor progress and what spikes you etc with just an annual HBa1C.
@Leon, I was reading Charles Stross's blog and half-way down the comments there was a discussion on how COVID had caused mild brain damage worldwide, and that this could be tracked by reduction in driving ability. The blog and comments section are here:
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
Step away from the conspiracy sir, step away. Real life isn’t always like airport potboiler scripts. Sometimes the lone idiot gets lucky.
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
I think it would be a great thing.
But I doubt many going to see the doctor want to be lectured on global warming.
Not least because we're continually told that doctors don't have enough time to see all their patients.
And, forgive me for being cynical, I wonder if we'll see yet more admin and 'targets' to see if doctors are doing what is deemed necessary for a 'net zero NHS'.
If you bother reading the actual RCP report it is mostly about reducing wastage, and also flagging up those most at risk from increasingly frequent and severe adverse weather events such as heatwaves.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
The outrage bus ? Thats's not my destination.
I know full well what bus I was on - it was the cynical one
Anyway I would guess that the reduction in winter freezing more than makes up for any increase in summer heatwaves as a health factor.
One of the things that is often overlooked - winter cold kills more than summer heat, certainly for the U.K.
Yes but we are more used to dealing with it, and there is good reason to advise patients of the risks of both. It isn't either/or.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Do you think that another 4 years of Biden's policy of giving Ukraine just enough to keep the front line roughly where it is but not enough to defeat Russia would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think 4 years of Trump/Vance not giving Ukraine anything and supporting Putin's annexation of territory would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think that the US is electing a world dictator and Trump would coerce every other potential ally of Ukraine into doing nothing to help?
Trump gave Europe the best two pieces of advice it has had for decades:
1) Increase defence spending 2) Stop dependence on Russian energy
And received nothing but abuse in response.
Perhaps those people who gave the abuse might do some apologising and act on Trump's advice.
That would, I suggest, be more likely to improve relations with him than yelling yet more abuse.
Bonkers Trump apologia.
Reality.
Deal with it.
Look at Vance's words:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon?
"And we were like, 'maybe it is Iran, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts', and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK - since Labour just took over."
What do those comments have to do with reality? Comments that were once only heard on fringe YouTube channels are not being uttered by the Republicans' Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.
Well if you're so concerned about what Vance is spouting it should make you want to increase defence spending.
Something we could have done when Trump was President the first time.
Stop deflecting and address the issue. Trump and Vance are dangerous fantasists. They are disconnected from reality. Why are you going out to bat for Trump?
You still avowedly believe in the wet market. You’re beyond fantasy. You’re a deluded imbecile
Indeed you’re so imbecilic you try and claim “the science is settled”. The consensus, according to you, is “the lab leak hypothesis is absurd”. Have you ever asked yourself how you’ve arrived at these terrifyingly stupid intellectual dead ends? That maybe you are the one with mental issues?
Vance is one of Thiel’s acolytes. I won’t say what I know about Thiel because he could outspend me in a court of law
He's one of them. (A German.)
His father wasn’t a fan of apartheid. He thought the government were softies
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Do you think that another 4 years of Biden's policy of giving Ukraine just enough to keep the front line roughly where it is but not enough to defeat Russia would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think 4 years of Trump/Vance not giving Ukraine anything and supporting Putin's annexation of territory would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think that the US is electing a world dictator and Trump would coerce every other potential ally of Ukraine into doing nothing to help?
That's your best non sequitur of the day. Biden has and will do more for Ukraine than Trump/Vance. The Ukrainians know that. The Americans know that. Most of us here know that. You keep denying it. Why?
You are in denial about the fact that Biden has also done negative things for Ukriane, both in terms of errors of omission and errors of commission.
He failed to deter Russia from invading in the first place (having met Putin in a summit meeting) and he actively prevented Ukraine from retaliating against Russian targets inside Russian territory out of fear of escalation.
Maybe Biden was right and he made every call perfectly and the situation today is as good as it could possibly have been for Ukraine, but I seriously doubt it.
And when Trump defunds Ukraine, you'll blame Sweden. The script is written already.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
Almost nothing had to go right for the shooter. The rally was advertised and he already had a gun. He left it late to get on the roof, so presumably would have gone elsewhere if the cops had beaten him to it.
What would have to go right for your local cop conspirators is that the Secret Service had to kill Crooks before he could talk, and that he had not already left a full confession somewhere that named his co-conspirators.
From the Telegraph. An example of why the government is near bankrupt
"Currently, state schools must automatically enrol their teaching staff in the TPS. Teachers pay in between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary, with a further 28.68pc added by their employer. Each year, these contributions receive a boost equal to inflation plus 1.6pc. When they retire, the final pot is used to provide a set pension for life, which also rises annually with inflation."
Yes, the TPS is one of the best going at the moment.
USS (universities) was until recently ~10% staff and 20% employer contribution, not miles off and less generous pension in the end. But these pensions do factor in to employment decisions. I'm in academia but currently having discussions about a similar role in a private company. the less substantial pension means I will absolutely be asking for substantially higher salary if we get to that point and walking away if the salary + pension doesn't compare favourably.
TLDR: Cut the TPS, you'll have to raise teacher salaries to not further exacerbate the recruitment and retention issues in education (I've no problem with such an approach - people can then make their own pension decisions)
Yes, teachers, and indeed most white collar public sector workers (I am one) are actually quite well compensated - there's just a strange balance towards pension over take home pay. Personally this suits me quite nicely and I would need a basic salary well, well in excess of what I am on now to be tempted to leave the public sector pension.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia?
I don't think most of Europe would listen to such an instruction - unless forced by eg secret kill switches exist.
Would we refrain from using F35s if Mr Chump or Mr Vance said so when we were under attack? Not on your nelly.
That’s not what it’s about. We knew what was happening in Ukraine at the start of the invasion largely because of US satellite and surveillance aircraft intelligence. Vance is advocating withdrawing that capability from Europe. Trump might well partially or wholly withdraw the US nuclear umbrella from Europe. Were that to happen, the confidence if the weaker member states that the rest of NATO would come to their aid is reduced, obviously.
Note he describes it as a “worst case scenario” we have to plan for, not a prediction of what will happen. If we don’t plan for, and take steps to deter it, then it tends to become more likely.
Whose F35s are going to be there is (for example) Putin were to stage an incursion into Romania ? What if Orban denied overflights ?
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
I think it would be a great thing.
But I doubt many going to see the doctor want to be lectured on global warming.
Not least because we're continually told that doctors don't have enough time to see all their patients.
And, forgive me for being cynical, I wonder if we'll see yet more admin and 'targets' to see if doctors are doing what is deemed necessary for a 'net zero NHS'.
If you bother reading the actual RCP report it is mostly about reducing wastage, and also flagging up those most at risk from increasingly frequent and severe adverse weather events such as heatwaves.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
The outrage bus ? Thats's not my destination.
I know full well what bus I was on - it was the cynical one
Anyway I would guess that the reduction in winter freezing more than makes up for any increase in summer heatwaves as a health factor.
One of the things that is often overlooked - winter cold kills more than summer heat, certainly for the U.K.
Yes but we are more used to dealing with it, and there is good reason to advise patients of the risks of both. It isn't either/or.
I think the issue is that giving advice about how to avoid death from excess heat IS a useful exercise for a doctor, telling them about climate change being affected by NHS actions probably isn’t, and might be more useful for a practice manager or other staff.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
From the Telegraph. An example of why the government is near bankrupt
"Currently, state schools must automatically enrol their teaching staff in the TPS. Teachers pay in between 7.4pc and 11.7pc of their salary, with a further 28.68pc added by their employer. Each year, these contributions receive a boost equal to inflation plus 1.6pc. When they retire, the final pot is used to provide a set pension for life, which also rises annually with inflation."
Yes, the TPS is one of the best going at the moment.
USS (universities) was until recently ~10% staff and 20% employer contribution, not miles off and less generous pension in the end. But these pensions do factor in to employment decisions. I'm in academia but currently having discussions about a similar role in a private company. the less substantial pension means I will absolutely be asking for substantially higher salary if we get to that point and walking away if the salary + pension doesn't compare favourably.
TLDR: Cut the TPS, you'll have to raise teacher salaries to not further exacerbate the recruitment and retention issues in education (I've no problem with such an approach - people can then make their own pension decisions)
Yes, teachers, and indeed most white collar public sector workers (I am one) are actually quite well compensated - there's just a strange balance towards pension over take home pay. Personally this suits me quite nicely and I would need a basic salary well, well in excess of what I am on now to be tempted to leave the public sector pension.
Yep. My take home is not excessive for my experience and qualifications, but the pension makes up for a lot, assuming I get to draw enough of it…
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
If it was a co-ordinated attempt don’t you think they’d find someone who was a better shot ? Alternatively it was simply a series of inept decisions by the secret service .
Of course it doesn’t help that they have open carry in that state .
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
Almost nothing had to go right for the shooter. The rally was advertised and he already had a gun. He left it late to get on the roof, so presumably would have gone elsewhere if the cops had beaten him to it.
What would have to go right for your local cop conspirators is that the Secret Service had to kill Crooks before he could talk, and that he had not already left a full confession somewhere that named his co-conspirators.
The seekyservs presumably have some of the best snipers in the world. Its not hard to believe they would kill Crooks seconds after confirmation that he shot at Trump
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
I think it would be a great thing.
But I doubt many going to see the doctor want to be lectured on global warming.
Not least because we're continually told that doctors don't have enough time to see all their patients.
And, forgive me for being cynical, I wonder if we'll see yet more admin and 'targets' to see if doctors are doing what is deemed necessary for a 'net zero NHS'.
If you bother reading the actual RCP report it is mostly about reducing wastage, and also flagging up those most at risk from increasingly frequent and severe adverse weather events such as heatwaves.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
The outrage bus ? Thats's not my destination.
I know full well what bus I was on - it was the cynical one
Anyway I would guess that the reduction in winter freezing more than makes up for any increase in summer heatwaves as a health factor.
One of the things that is often overlooked - winter cold kills more than summer heat, certainly for the U.K.
Yes but we are more used to dealing with it, and there is good reason to advise patients of the risks of both. It isn't either/or.
I think the issue is that giving advice about how to avoid death from excess heat IS a useful exercise for a doctor, telling them about climate change being affected by NHS actions probably isn’t, and might be more useful for a practice manager or other staff.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia?
I don't think most of Europe would listen to such an instruction - unless forced by eg secret kill switches exist.
Would we refrain from using F35s if Mr Chump or Mr Vance said so when we were under attack? Not on your nelly.
That’s not what it’s about. We knew what was happening in Ukraine at the start of the invasion largely because of US satellite and surveillance aircraft intelligence. Vance is advocating withdrawing that capability from Europe. Trump might well partially or wholly withdraw the US nuclear umbrella from Europe. Were that to happen, the confidence if the weaker member states that the rest of NATO would come to their aid is reduced, obviously.
Note he describes it as a “worst case scenario” we have to plan for, not a prediction of what will happen. If we don’t plan for, and take steps to deter it, then it tends to become more likely.
Whose F35s are going to be there is (for example) Putin were to stage an incursion into Romania ? What if Orban denied overflights ?
Not just continental Europe. Trump-Vance are very clear: Labour is an Islamist party. The next step is to suspect security cooperation with Starmer's government as a security risk. Then there will be a trans-Atlantic campaign to install Farage as PM.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
I can absolutely believe local LE ware bribed (or threatened) to look the other way.
The shooter having absolutely virtually no internet footprint is a red flag for me that makes me think this is maybe more than a random weird loner.
Random weird loners LOVE posting random shit on the internet. Er, probably.
Either way, they usually don't have zero online footprint before showing up with an AR15 to kill the former and possibly next President. That alone stinks to f*k.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
Pathetic. Is that the best you can do?
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Do you think that another 4 years of Biden's policy of giving Ukraine just enough to keep the front line roughly where it is but not enough to defeat Russia would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think 4 years of Trump/Vance not giving Ukraine anything and supporting Putin's annexation of territory would be a good outcome for Ukraine?
Do you think that the US is electing a world dictator and Trump would coerce every other potential ally of Ukraine into doing nothing to help?
That's your best non sequitur of the day. Biden has and will do more for Ukraine than Trump/Vance. The Ukrainians know that. The Americans know that. Most of us here know that. You keep denying it. Why?
You are in denial about the fact that Biden has also done negative things for Ukriane, both in terms of errors of omission and errors of commission.
He failed to deter Russia from invading in the first place (having met Putin in a summit meeting) and he actively prevented Ukraine from retaliating against Russian targets inside Russian territory out of fear of escalation.
Maybe Biden was right and he made every call perfectly and the situation today is as good as it could possibly have been for Ukraine, but I seriously doubt it.
He has not, however, been impeached for denying assistance to Ukraine because they wouldn't give him kompromat on Hunter Biden. So swings and roundabouts.
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
I think it would be a great thing.
But I doubt many going to see the doctor want to be lectured on global warming.
Not least because we're continually told that doctors don't have enough time to see all their patients.
And, forgive me for being cynical, I wonder if we'll see yet more admin and 'targets' to see if doctors are doing what is deemed necessary for a 'net zero NHS'.
If you bother reading the actual RCP report it is mostly about reducing wastage, and also flagging up those most at risk from increasingly frequent and severe adverse weather events such as heatwaves.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
The outrage bus ? Thats's not my destination.
I know full well what bus I was on - it was the cynical one
Anyway I would guess that the reduction in winter freezing more than makes up for any increase in summer heatwaves as a health factor.
One of the things that is often overlooked - winter cold kills more than summer heat, certainly for the U.K.
Yes but we are more used to dealing with it, and there is good reason to advise patients of the risks of both. It isn't either/or.
I think the issue is that giving advice about how to avoid death from excess heat IS a useful exercise for a doctor, telling them about climate change being affected by NHS actions probably isn’t, and might be more useful for a practice manager or other staff.
Yes, but staff is who the document is aimed at.
Top line says doctors to discuss climate change with their patients. Unless that’s misleading?
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
If it was a co-ordinated attempt don’t you think they’d find someone who was a better shot ? Alternatively it was simply a series of inept decisions by the secret service .
Of course it doesn’t help that they have open carry in that state .
No, because whoever took the shot had to be persuaded they would survive it. Otherwise it’s obviously immediate suicide. There is zero evidence anywhere that Crooks was suicidal. None. So you need someone who is not that bright, and perhaps a not especially handsome dude who could be easily manipulated by a beautiful young [ukrainian] woman
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
The thing is, if it was a conspiracy to kill Trump it was a particularly inept one, because clearly he's still alive and now rather better placed to win the election. If we assume conspiracy and ask cui bono, clearly it's a cleverly executed Trumpite conspiracy. Unless it subsequently comes out that it WAS a Trumpite conspiracy, in which case the establishment bonos, and it therefore must be an establishment conspiracy. And so on. Exhausting.
"Sloping roof used by assassin ‘too dangerous’ for Secret Service agents
The US Secret Service did not put agents on the rooftop where an assassin shot at Donald Trump for health and safety reasons, the head of the agency has said.
Kimberly Cheatle, the Secret Service director, said the “sloped roof” where Thomas Matthew Crooks was positioned on Saturday could have posed a risk to agents.
“That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
“And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.”"
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
The problem with all conspiracy theories is that they all require an extraordinary level of complicity and planning by large numbers of people, who then have to keep omerta that is tighter than any mafiosa.
Even if PC Plod wanted Trump dead, how could he be sure his mates did too?, and why would the centrepiece be an inexperience 20 year old who works as a diet assistant in a care home?
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
I can absolutely believe local LE ware bribed (or threatened) to look the other way.
The shooter having absolutely virtually no internet footprint is a red flag for me that makes me think this is maybe more than a random weird loner.
Random weird loners LOVE posting random shit on the internet. Er, probably.
Either way, they usually don't have zero online footprint before showing up with an AR15 to kill the former and possibly next President. That alone stinks to f*k.
I point again to the large Ukrainian community in Pennsylvania. Second biggest in the USA
Surely a few cops in that community?
And, frankly, if I was Ukrainian I would probably think slotting Trump was completely justified
"Sloping roof used by assassin ‘too dangerous’ for Secret Service agents
The US Secret Service did not put agents on the rooftop where an assassin shot at Donald Trump for health and safety reasons, the head of the agency has said.
Kimberly Cheatle, the Secret Service director, said the “sloped roof” where Thomas Matthew Crooks was positioned on Saturday could have posed a risk to agents.
“That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
“And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.”"
"Sloping roof used by assassin ‘too dangerous’ for Secret Service agents
The US Secret Service did not put agents on the rooftop where an assassin shot at Donald Trump for health and safety reasons, the head of the agency has said.
Kimberly Cheatle, the Secret Service director, said the “sloped roof” where Thomas Matthew Crooks was positioned on Saturday could have posed a risk to agents.
“That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
“And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.”"
"Sloping roof used by assassin ‘too dangerous’ for Secret Service agents
The US Secret Service did not put agents on the rooftop where an assassin shot at Donald Trump for health and safety reasons, the head of the agency has said.
Kimberly Cheatle, the Secret Service director, said the “sloped roof” where Thomas Matthew Crooks was positioned on Saturday could have posed a risk to agents.
“That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
“And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.”"
Doctors have been told to discuss climate change with their patients in guidance that says they are “uniquely placed” as a trusted members of the community to explain the impacts of global warming.
A “green toolkit” published by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) also advises doctors to reduce “unnecessary” prescriptions and blood tests to help the NHS to reach its net zero target.
Pumping more money into the NHS is “not feasible” while it fails to improve productivity, Labour’s new health adviser has warned as he insisted GPs and hospitals must be rewired to spend public funds better.
You don't think that reducing unnecessary prescriptions and blood tests would be a good thing?
I think it would be a great thing.
But I doubt many going to see the doctor want to be lectured on global warming.
Not least because we're continually told that doctors don't have enough time to see all their patients.
And, forgive me for being cynical, I wonder if we'll see yet more admin and 'targets' to see if doctors are doing what is deemed necessary for a 'net zero NHS'.
If you bother reading the actual RCP report it is mostly about reducing wastage, and also flagging up those most at risk from increasingly frequent and severe adverse weather events such as heatwaves.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
The outrage bus ? Thats's not my destination.
I know full well what bus I was on - it was the cynical one
Anyway I would guess that the reduction in winter freezing more than makes up for any increase in summer heatwaves as a health factor.
One of the things that is often overlooked - winter cold kills more than summer heat, certainly for the U.K.
Yes but we are more used to dealing with it, and there is good reason to advise patients of the risks of both. It isn't either/or.
I think the issue is that giving advice about how to avoid death from excess heat IS a useful exercise for a doctor, telling them about climate change being affected by NHS actions probably isn’t, and might be more useful for a practice manager or other staff.
Yes, but staff is who the document is aimed at.
Top line says doctors to discuss climate change with their patients. Unless that’s misleading?
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
I can absolutely believe local LE ware bribed (or threatened) to look the other way.
The shooter having absolutely virtually no internet footprint is a red flag for me that makes me think this is maybe more than a random weird loner.
Random weird loners LOVE posting random shit on the internet. Er, probably.
Either way, they usually don't have zero online footprint before showing up with an AR15 to kill the former and possibly next President. That alone stinks to f*k.
I thought he was active on discord? Why does he have to use anything else?
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
Almost nothing had to go right for the shooter. The rally was advertised and he already had a gun. He left it late to get on the roof, so presumably would have gone elsewhere if the cops had beaten him to it.
What would have to go right for your local cop conspirators is that the Secret Service had to kill Crooks before he could talk, and that he had not already left a full confession somewhere that named his co-conspirators.
The seekyservs presumably have some of the best snipers in the world. Its not hard to believe they would kill Crooks seconds after confirmation that he shot at Trump
There's still a chance Crooks could have got away if he could get inside the building immediately after shooting at Trump, and a greater chance he could have left a confession or manifesto behind, as is not uncommon in these cases.
Far more likely Crooks was an idiot who got his 15 minutes of fame.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
The thing is, if it was a conspiracy to kill Trump it was a particularly inept one, because clearly he's still alive and now rather better placed to win the election. If we assume conspiracy and ask cui bono, clearly it's a cleverly executed Trumpite conspiracy. Unless it subsequently comes out that it WAS a Trumpite conspiracy, in which case the establishment bonos, and it therefore must be an establishment conspiracy. And so on. Exhausting.
I know it’s exhausting. But it’s also fun
In addition. The lone nutter thing just doesn’t add up. Too many anomalies
The only person in the world with no presence on the internet? That alone is unbelievable
"Sloping roof used by assassin ‘too dangerous’ for Secret Service agents
The US Secret Service did not put agents on the rooftop where an assassin shot at Donald Trump for health and safety reasons, the head of the agency has said.
Kimberly Cheatle, the Secret Service director, said the “sloped roof” where Thomas Matthew Crooks was positioned on Saturday could have posed a risk to agents.
“That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
“And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.”"
Newsnight: dissent in Labour ranks already, with Kim Johnson MP pointing out that there's nothing in the King's Speech addressing child poverty, whereas there was in the Labour manifesto. She's the MP for Liverpool Riverside.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
I can absolutely believe local LE ware bribed (or threatened) to look the other way.
The shooter having absolutely virtually no internet footprint is a red flag for me that makes me think this is maybe more than a random weird loner.
Random weird loners LOVE posting random shit on the internet. Er, probably.
Either way, they usually don't have zero online footprint before showing up with an AR15 to kill the former and possibly next President. That alone stinks to f*k.
Try searching for old school or college mates, or even current colleagues. Lots of people don't post on social media. Hence the pb mantra that TwiX is not real life.
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
The problem with all conspiracy theories is that they all require an extraordinary level of complicity and planning by large numbers of people, who then have to keep omerta that is tighter than any mafiosa.
Even if PC Plod wanted Trump dead, how could he be sure his mates did too?, and why would the centrepiece be an inexperience 20 year old who works as a diet assistant in a care home?
No, they don’t. They need a few local cops looking away at the right time, and an inept seekyservs stuffed with tiny inexperienced women. Voila
This was, I am tending to believe, a co-ordinated attempt to kill Trump. Far too many things had to go incredibly right for a lone nutter like Crooks to get as far as he did
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
After years as a mid level corporate drone, I've learned to never ascribe to malice what can easily be attributed to sheer incompetence. Several competing government agencies securing a perimeter with differing chains of command would fall into this category.
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
Occam’s razor says, to me, a low level local conspiracy
I can absolutely believe local LE ware bribed (or threatened) to look the other way.
The shooter having absolutely virtually no internet footprint is a red flag for me that makes me think this is maybe more than a random weird loner.
Random weird loners LOVE posting random shit on the internet. Er, probably.
Either way, they usually don't have zero online footprint before showing up with an AR15 to kill the former and possibly next President. That alone stinks to f*k.
I point again to the large Ukrainian community in Pennsylvania. Second biggest in the USA
Surely a few cops in that community?
And, frankly, if I was Ukrainian I would probably think slotting Trump was completely justified
Do you know how hard it is to make someone's digital imprint go away? That is state level actors, not random Ukes.
Random murderers without an online profile do happen, like the las vegas guy in 2017. But by and large they have mahoosive giveaways like sending out crank manifestos, livestreaming their whackadoodery to their mates on 8chan and generally having a long standing posting history (either sane or insane) on social media.
This guy is a blank after several days of the whole internet trying to find him. That alone is weird and suspcicious.
Pretty sure if I'd tried to whack Trump, some random chinless 4channer would have linked my writing style and my use of commas and conditional prepositions to some paper I published a decade ago under my own name, thus giving the media thousands of posts to pour over.
This assassin guy though? The attention of the whole internet is on him and nobody finds jack shit? Highly sus.
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
What does sitting it out look like in practice?
Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia?
I don't think most of Europe would listen to such an instruction - unless forced by eg secret kill switches exist.
Would we refrain from using F35s if Mr Chump or Mr Vance said so when we were under attack? Not on your nelly.
That’s not what it’s about. We knew what was happening in Ukraine at the start of the invasion largely because of US satellite and surveillance aircraft intelligence. Vance is advocating withdrawing that capability from Europe. Trump might well partially or wholly withdraw the US nuclear umbrella from Europe. Were that to happen, the confidence if the weaker member states that the rest of NATO would come to their aid is reduced, obviously.
Note he describes it as a “worst case scenario” we have to plan for, not a prediction of what will happen. If we don’t plan for, and take steps to deter it, then it tends to become more likely.
Whose F35s are going to be there is (for example) Putin were to stage an incursion into Romania ? What if Orban denied overflights ?
Not just continental Europe. Trump-Vance are very clear: Labour is an Islamist party. The next step is to suspect security cooperation with Starmer's government as a security risk. Then there will be a trans-Atlantic campaign to install Farage as PM.
Let’s be clear, we don’t know what a re-elected Trump would do. Starmer has gone rather further in courting Trump, since he became PM, than was expected. And Vance won’t make any decisions on issues Trump actually cares about.
But what’s absolutely certain is that Biden is a strong advocate for Nato, and that’s not going to change - while it’s entirely possible that Trump might decide to withdraw from it completely.
Comments
Indeed you’re so imbecilic you try and claim “the science is settled”. The consensus, according to you, is “the lab leak hypothesis is absurd”. Have you ever asked yourself how you’ve arrived at these terrifyingly stupid intellectual dead ends? That maybe you are the one with mental issues?
Good start from Starmer. ✅
https://x.com/sydsteyerhart/status/1813310200352243764
Backers convinced that former home secretary is only candidate who can unite Conservative Party"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/16/priti-patel-kemi-badenoch-braverman-mordaunt-tugendhat/
“This story keeps getting more bizarre. CNN is reporting Crooks bought 50 rounds of ammo, a 12' ladder from Home Depot and walked a mile to the rally with his father's AR-15, the ammo, and the ladder in tow. Nobody noticed him or stopped him?”
https://x.com/amuse/status/1813290589695156296?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
Europe would have been in a better situation if it had done so.
You don't have to support Trump or think that he cared about anyone other than himself when he said that.
But he has been proven correct.
A dude could wander into a McDonalds there with an AR15 slung over his shoulder and it would be normal.
Not saying this happens all the time, but it happens enough that 'hey, that dude's wandering round with an ar-15 over his shoulder' wouldn't be the WTF it would be in most other places around the world.
But why bother when you can hop straight on the outrage bus?
It doesn’t talk of a full scale invasion. An incursion into one of the weaker members, after the US says it’s going to sit out any European conflicts, is just the kind of gamble Putin is capable of.
If what remains of NATO hesitates to respond with assistance, then the eastern border states start thinking about making accommodations with Russia.
It’s not a prediction of what will happen; rather something that becomes a dangerous possibility. Especially if Trump withdraws assistance to Ukraine.
We don't have very long to think about it - and European re-armament is on a much slower timetable.
(But I agree that the Farage suggestion is fairly daft.)
Of course, some people would opt out of the whole thing, waste it all, and then claim pension credit and housing benefit.
Like the fact the shooter was spotted 30 minutes before the shooting. On the roof. By anxious rally goers. Who told the police.
Like the fact that 2 minutes before the shooting they knew he had a gun and was aiming. And they didn’t warn Trump
Like the fact the roof the shooter used was left deliberately vacant because the seekyservs apparently felt the sloped roof was dangerous for agents even tho they had agents on other steeper roofs
Like the fact that they deliberately excised the most obvious location from which to shoot Trump - that roof - from the operable perimeter
Like the fact that the shooter is the only person in the universe with no internet presence
Like the fact that a cop actually confronted Crooks on the roof a few minutes before the shooting, and was menaced; and backed down; and still they didn’t warn Trump
When you add it all together…
You’re suggesting that’s not something to be concerned about.
Would they close their embassy and pull everyone out? Would they ban that country from using US weapons to retaliate against Russia? Would they announce that the government probably has only a few days left in power?
In other words would they treat them like Joe Biden treated Ukraine?
He's a law flouting narcissist who only cares about himself.
While Vance is a posturing loud mouth who spouts what he think his audience wants to hear.
But Trump was correct that Europe needed to increase defence spending and reduce reliance on Russian energy.
He may have been correct by accident or for his own self-serving reasons but correct he still was.
And Trump has an ego, which others might pander to for their own benefit - its what Vance has done after all.
So pander to Trump's ego by telling him he was right - he'd love that and something might be got in return.
Now that might be distasteful to many but European governments have done likewise many times before.
Virtually all my Type 1 patients love the data and control that their CGM gives them, and nearly all have much better control. It is also very psychologically good for them. The closed loop systems even more so.
I think psychological aspects of diabetes are underestimated by most practitioners. The root cause of poor control amongst my patients is in their heads. I have patients in denial, in depression, with eating disorders, with anger management issues and substance abuse. It's a tough condition to live with and people do not get a holiday from it. Psychological support and empowerment via CGM can really put some of my patients back in control of their lives.
Trump/Vance have made clear that they support Putin carving up Ukraine. Biden is supporting Ukraine with vast amounts of military equipment.
You can say ice is hot, water is dry and butterflies taste of peppermint, but it is clear that the Ukrainians will be praying night and day for a Biden win.
Would we refrain from using F35s if Mr Chump or Mr Vance said so when we were under attack? Not on your nelly.
Sees that the site Twat is still staggering about ranting on about anything and everything
*Leaves*
I know full well what bus I was on - it was the cynical one
Anyway I would guess that the reduction in winter freezing more than makes up for any increase in summer heatwaves as a health factor.
If that’s the case what’s left is: how high did the co-ordination go. Perhaps it was just low level. A few local cops
https://nitter.poast.org/FRHoffmann1/status/1813198919683436604#m
Sometimes the lone idiot gets lucky.
You can see the latest accounts here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6508172522a783000d43e734/2022-2023_TPS_Annual_Report_and_Accounts.pdf
(I may have this wrong? But reading the accounts that seems to be the position - the TPS is a Resource Annually Managed Expenditure of the UK government. Not a trust or an entity that holds assets, except in the short term. Any deficit / profit is an accounting number.)
(Edit: Nope. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1061788/CBG_2022-23.pdf says that the TPS is unfunded - see para 12.2)
Now he would work for Dignitas and be celebrated rather than condemned.
He failed to deter Russia from invading in the first place (having met Putin in a summit meeting) and he actively prevented Ukraine from retaliating against Russian targets inside Russian territory out of fear of escalation.
Maybe Biden was right and he made every call perfectly and the situation today is as good as it could possibly have been for Ukraine, but I seriously doubt it.
CGM would be nice but they don't prescribe it for type 2 (so £100 a month to buy) In fact I was several years in before they prescribed test strips. Had been buying them for years on amazon before that. Heaven knows how people are supposed to monitor progress and what spikes you etc with just an annual HBa1C.
https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2024/07/the-coming-storm-part-2.html#comments
https://patterico.com/2024/07/12/weekend-open-thread-234/#comment-2796395
(Comment 688)
My most recent comment is numbered 752.
(For the record, I do not know Klink, or anything about him, beyond what he has said at that site.)
Though I wouldn't rule out the idea that low level officals could be bribed, either. Local LE responsible for securing that particular roof? Much easier to be got at than a secret service detachment.
Plus if the secret service sniper had eyes on the target (they neutralised him within a couple of seconds of him opening fire) you could guess they couldn't get authorisation to open fire or confirmation that the sniper wasn't local LE before then.
Incompetence first, with the possibility of a corrupt local LE on top. But as always, Occam's razor.
What would have to go right for your local cop conspirators is that the Secret Service had to kill Crooks before he could talk, and that he had not already left a full confession somewhere that named his co-conspirators.
We knew what was happening in Ukraine at the start of the invasion largely because of US satellite and surveillance aircraft intelligence. Vance is advocating withdrawing that capability from Europe. Trump might well partially or wholly withdraw the US nuclear umbrella from Europe.
Were that to happen, the confidence if the weaker member states that the rest of NATO would come to their aid is reduced, obviously.
This is the thread from January, to which I posted the update a bit earlier upthread:
https://x.com/FRHoffmann1/status/1746589423251403236
Note he describes it as a “worst case scenario” we have to plan for, not a prediction of what will happen. If we don’t plan for, and take steps to deter it, then it tends to become more likely.
Whose F35s are going to be there is (for example) Putin were to stage an incursion into Romania ? What if Orban denied overflights ?
Of course it doesn’t help that they have open carry in that state .
The shooter having absolutely virtually no internet footprint is a red flag for me that makes me think this is maybe more than a random weird loner.
Random weird loners LOVE posting random shit on the internet. Er, probably.
Either way, they usually don't have zero online footprint before showing up with an AR15 to kill the former and possibly next President. That alone stinks to f*k.
Unless it subsequently comes out that it WAS a Trumpite conspiracy, in which case the establishment bonos, and it therefore must be an establishment conspiracy.
And so on. Exhausting.
The US Secret Service did not put agents on the rooftop where an assassin shot at Donald Trump for health and safety reasons, the head of the agency has said.
Kimberly Cheatle, the Secret Service director, said the “sloped roof” where Thomas Matthew Crooks was positioned on Saturday could have posed a risk to agents.
“That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she told ABC News on Tuesday.
“And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.”"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/07/16/thomas-crooks-sloping-rooftop-kimberly-cheatle-snipers/
Even if PC Plod wanted Trump dead, how could he be sure his mates did too?, and why would the centrepiece be an inexperience 20 year old who works as a diet assistant in a care home?
Surely a few cops in that community?
And, frankly, if I was Ukrainian I would probably think slotting Trump was completely justified
This gently sloping roof was too dangerous for trained snipers??? What????
https://www.rcp.ac.uk/media/0lppfhmw/rcp-green-physician-toolkit.pdf
Far more likely Crooks was an idiot who got his 15 minutes of fame.
In addition. The lone nutter thing just doesn’t add up. Too many anomalies
The only person in the world with no presence on the internet? That alone is unbelievable
Random murderers without an online profile do happen, like the las vegas guy in 2017. But by and large they have mahoosive giveaways like sending out crank manifestos, livestreaming their whackadoodery to their mates on 8chan and generally having a long standing posting history (either sane or insane) on social media.
This guy is a blank after several days of the whole internet trying to find him. That alone is weird and suspcicious.
Pretty sure if I'd tried to whack Trump, some random chinless 4channer would have linked my writing style and my use of commas and conditional prepositions to some paper I published a decade ago under my own name, thus giving the media thousands of posts to pour over.
This assassin guy though? The attention of the whole internet is on him and nobody finds jack shit? Highly sus.
Starmer has gone rather further in courting Trump, since he became PM, than was expected. And Vance won’t make any decisions on issues Trump actually cares about.
But what’s absolutely certain is that Biden is a strong advocate for Nato, and that’s not going to change - while it’s entirely possible that Trump might decide to withdraw from it completely.