Unpopular opinion on here but I don't think it's fair to describe peace talks/deal in Ukraine as appeasement.
There was lots of fighting done to get to this point, and it looks like both Ukraine and Russia have suffered massive massive losses.
I can't pretend to know what's in Putins head, but if he is in anyway rationale he must see that further military adventures in Europe are going to be very costly. If a peace deal involved European troops in Ukraine to guarantee it, surely that further raises costs of breaking the rules. But its pretty shit for the Ukranians who are now part of Russia....
Your assumption of what is in Putins head is the problem.
He will think further military adventures will be tolerated by the West. He does not give a damn about the human cost, it is all about expanding the map.
But like... this military incursion wasn't tolerated? As in Europe (and US) mobilised enormous resources to thwart his invasion and are now rearming?
The people who didn't tolerate it have been voted out and replaced (or will be replaced) by ones who don't give a shit.
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
Someone is gunning for her internally, clearly. Wonder who?
Streeting going for the Chancellorship perhaps?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h I'm also not sure how that happens innocently. How does four and a half years become, in your own head, "a decade"? Who misremembers four and a half years as being a decade?
It probably felt that long.
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
Unpopular opinion on here but I don't think it's fair to describe peace talks/deal in Ukraine as appeasement.
There was lots of fighting done to get to this point, and it looks like both Ukraine and Russia have suffered massive massive losses.
I can't pretend to know what's in Putins head, but if he is in anyway rationale he must see that further military adventures in Europe are going to be very costly. If a peace deal involved European troops in Ukraine to guarantee it, surely that further raises costs of breaking the rules. But its pretty shit for the Ukranians who are now part of Russia....
There will be more imperial expansion following a Ukraine “deal”, of course. Most regional opinion seems to expect this to be on a softer target. After a couple of years of rebuilding, and presumably following a US lifting of economic sanctions, Russia will have a go at extending its grip on Georgia, taking more of Moldova (though Geography makes that hard), completing Anschluss with Belarus and having a nibble at the Baltics to see what NATO does.
Trump has now signalled clearly that Eastern Europe is Russia’s sphere of influence and fair game. His remarkable pre-announcement of concessions to pretty much Russia’s entire wish list was truly the fart of the deal.
So well worth throwing away two hundreds of democracy for.
I posted about egg prices and inflation earlier in the week.
That will do for Trump far more than any of the issues on here people obsess about.
He nailed his mast to solving cost of living. If he fails he's done. Inflation is creeping back up and now egg prices are on the rise.
There is an egg shortage in America owing to bird flu.
True, but this predates the November election and the Trumpdozer cut the administration no slack on it, so he deserves none in return.
All excuses, Trump promised this, he promised to sort cost of living. The people who matter to Trump, the voters, will care far more about that than worrying about war in the future over Ukraine
Bad news for death and destruction fans this morning.
Well done Trump.
SKS fans why has your boy promised £300Bn to Ukraine but is cutting disability payments at home.
Presumably all the Ukranians over here have no excuse not to return home now
"Well done Trump"?
You do realise that the actions of the US government are actually massively destabilisng to the world, and are more likely to lead to wider conflict?
This is appeasement Mk 2.
He is an appeaser, so he's happy with that.
Boo hoo
Your boy that you assured us was going to win
Hasnt
So I take it you are on Putin's side? You want war and destruction? You want the imperialism and fascism ro sweep over Ukraine and eastern Europe?
Just because you hate Starmer?
Side of a more peaceful world and a stop to pissing our taxes into a unwinnable war black hole.
Putins an arse but him not winning was just an impossible wet dream
Have you not noticed how Russia has spent three years not winning, with the west doing the absolute minimum possible to help Ukraine?
The concept of 'Russia stronk' died out in March 2022. They are easily defeatable. But the political will to do so isn't currently there. This makes wider war much more likely.
But it seems you support both Hamas and Putin: what is it about imperialism and fascism, mass murder and anti-Semitism that you like so much?
I support an end to the killing in both conflicts.You support kids been shot in the head as long as there only Arabs.
Seems you just can't get enough death and destruction
Your goodie baddie and Western World police depiction of world affairs is over for the next 4 years
You're a liar.
You support death and destruction, when it's inflicted upon people you hate (Jews, Ukrainians).
Biden has to shoulder some responsibility here. A friend who's an expert in US history said close to the outset that he thought the US would provide enough support to stop Ukraine losing but not enough to end the war. His reading was that the US wanted Russia tied up in a long conflict and had no humanitarian considerations. That's what seems to have played out, though in hindsight the only point at which it could have been ended swiftly was right at the beginning when the Russian tanks were stuck on the roads.
A popular thesis but I don't think it was as Machiavellian as that. The US response was to give Ukraine enough to fight without risking escalation into a Russia v NATO conflict. You can argue they were too risk averse on the latter. And although it was not imo The Plan to create a long and bloody war of attrition it was the upshot. So in a sense it doesn't matter whether I'm right or your mate is.
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
The one on exaggerating her time at BoE also reveals that she left HBOS with a compromise agreement. The BBC says HBOS used it when senior managers were made redundant. I don't know if that is the only situation where HBOS used such agreements, but they are generally used whenever an employer wants to get rid of an employee without risking a claim for unfair dismissal. This is also mentioned in the expenses article. It seems the BBC has been supplied with a statement from her lawyer saying that no allegations of wrongdoing or misconduct were mentioned by the HBOS HR team during this process. In my experience, such allegations are usually conveyed to the employee by their manager and are not communicated to the employee's lawyer by the employer. So it is certainly possible that she was sacked over the expenses issue.
Most redundancies / pay offs from large firms involve a compromise agreement. You sign away the right to make a claim in future in exchange for an enhanced pay off. Some shitty firms demand a compromise agreement without an enhanced payoff, my Dad had a client who got angry when he advised him not to sign the compromise agreement because they were only being offered statutory. "HR said you'd be difficult!!"
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
The one on exaggerating her time at BoE also reveals that she left HBOS with a compromise agreement. The BBC says HBOS used it when senior managers were made redundant. I don't know if that is the only situation where HBOS used such agreements, but they are generally used whenever an employer wants to get rid of an employee without risking a claim for unfair dismissal. This is also mentioned in the expenses article. It seems the BBC has been supplied with a statement from her lawyer saying that no allegations of wrongdoing or misconduct were mentioned by the HBOS HR team during this process. In my experience, such allegations are usually conveyed to the employee by their manager and are not communicated to the employee's lawyer by the employer. So it is certainly possible that she was sacked over the expenses issue.
Most redundancies / pay offs from large firms involve a compromise agreement. You sign away the right to make a claim in future in exchange for an enhanced pay off. Some shitty firms demand a compromise agreement without an enhanced payoff, my Dad had a client who got angry when he advised him not to sign the compromise agreement because they were only being offered statutory. "HR said you'd be difficult!!"
Viewcode: Good morning CoPilot. I have a question for you. Can you help me please?
CoPilot: Good morning! I'm here to help. What's your question? Let's dive in!
Viewcode: I have recieved the following request: "I need a [redacted] calculation for [redacted]. The expected change would be a reduction in [redacted] from [redacted] to [redacted]. We have [redacted] participating and they are [redacted]." Please give me the code to do this calculation in the SAS language.
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you. Can you do that again, this time in the Stata language please?
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
The one on exaggerating her time at BoE also reveals that she left HBOS with a compromise agreement. The BBC says HBOS used it when senior managers were made redundant. I don't know if that is the only situation where HBOS used such agreements, but they are generally used whenever an employer wants to get rid of an employee without risking a claim for unfair dismissal. This is also mentioned in the expenses article. It seems the BBC has been supplied with a statement from her lawyer saying that no allegations of wrongdoing or misconduct were mentioned by the HBOS HR team during this process. In my experience, such allegations are usually conveyed to the employee by their manager and are not communicated to the employee's lawyer by the employer. So it is certainly possible that she was sacked over the expenses issue.
Most redundancies / pay offs from large firms involve a compromise agreement. You sign away the right to make a claim in future in exchange for an enhanced pay off. Some shitty firms demand a compromise agreement without an enhanced payoff, my Dad had a client who got angry when he advised him not to sign the compromise agreement because they were only being offered statutory. "HR said you'd be difficult!!"
Our place has just made some people redundant, enhanced terms, they all had to sign compromise agreements.
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
Someone is gunning for her internally, clearly. Wonder who?
Streeting going for the Chancellorship perhaps?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h I'm also not sure how that happens innocently. How does four and a half years become, in your own head, "a decade"? Who misremembers four and a half years as being a decade?
It probably felt that long.
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
Tbh I could not accurately date the early part of what some laughingly call my career. I could just about put jobs in the right order.
-3.2% business investment in Q4, dragging down the annual rate from 4.4% growth to -0.7%, if that's not the warning sign flashing red I don't know what is.
If you used that as a recession signal it wouldn't do a great job, as the number is quite volatile and a decline of that magnitude isn't especially uncommon, nor is the level of business investment especially weak, it has simply unwound increases seen in previous quarters. I would be worried if we see a similar drop in Q1. For now, more a flashing amber signal than a flashing red one, if you ask me.
Viewcode: Good morning CoPilot. I have a question for you. Can you help me please?
CoPilot: Good morning! I'm here to help. What's your question? Let's dive in!
Viewcode: I have recieved the following request: "I need a [redacted] calculation for [redacted]. The expected change would be a reduction in [redacted] from [redacted] to [redacted]. We have [redacted] participating and they are [redacted]." Please give me the code to do this calculation in the SAS language.
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you. Can you do that again, this time in the Stata language please?
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you CoPilot
(goes to lunch)
Super impressive that it can correctly fill in all those awkward redactions for you. Major implications for FOIA based journalism, no doubt.
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
Someone is gunning for her internally, clearly. Wonder who?
Streeting going for the Chancellorship perhaps?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h I'm also not sure how that happens innocently. How does four and a half years become, in your own head, "a decade"? Who misremembers four and a half years as being a decade?
It probably felt that long.
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
So by the Reeves method you are leaving just after midnight?
I have just had my first go at Civ 7 - what a disappointment! Where to start?. The aim of the game is to take a civilisation from beginning to a conclusion. Now you have a jump to another civilisation twice. In terms of visual quality the detail of the landscape is superb but it is sometimes difficult to see what each tile is for. Also the workers have disappeared so you have no choice on what to build. It seems that linking units has gone so you cannot for example protect a settler with an archer. Also gone are waves hitting the shore. So unless a substantial upgrade is coming it's back to Civ6.
Viewcode: Good morning CoPilot. I have a question for you. Can you help me please?
CoPilot: Good morning! I'm here to help. What's your question? Let's dive in!
Viewcode: I have recieved the following request: "I need a [redacted] calculation for [redacted]. The expected change would be a reduction in [redacted] from [redacted] to [redacted]. We have [redacted] participating and they are [redacted]." Please give me the code to do this calculation in the SAS language.
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you. Can you do that again, this time in the Stata language please?
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you CoPilot
(goes to lunch)
You learn how to use AI ... early lunch. Your boss learns how to use AI ... early retirement.
Viewcode: Good morning CoPilot. I have a question for you. Can you help me please?
CoPilot: Good morning! I'm here to help. What's your question? Let's dive in!
Viewcode: I have recieved the following request: "I need a [redacted] calculation for [redacted]. The expected change would be a reduction in [redacted] from [redacted] to [redacted]. We have [redacted] participating and they are [redacted]." Please give me the code to do this calculation in the SAS language.
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you. Can you do that again, this time in the Stata language please?
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you CoPilot
(goes to lunch)
Super impressive that it can correctly fill in all those awkward redactions for you. Major implications for FOIA based journalism, no doubt.
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
Someone is gunning for her internally, clearly. Wonder who?
Streeting going for the Chancellorship perhaps?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h I'm also not sure how that happens innocently. How does four and a half years become, in your own head, "a decade"? Who misremembers four and a half years as being a decade?
It probably felt that long.
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
Tbh I could not accurately date the early part of what some laughingly call my career. I could just about put jobs in the right order.
To be fair you are not the Chancellor. Whenever her linked in was done - by her staff no less, apparently - she would have provided her dates of employment, maybe from an existing CV? Probably quite important to be accurate if you are hoping to be in charge of the nation’s finances.
Maybe a sensible personwould check as well if it’s correct before you tell your “staff” to release the info?
So if the info was taken from a CV then the CV was false and raises questions about who that CV was submitted to.
If the CV or source of info was incorrect why didn’t RR point out that the detail was wrong - she does check details right?
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
Someone is gunning for her internally, clearly. Wonder who?
Streeting going for the Chancellorship perhaps?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h I'm also not sure how that happens innocently. How does four and a half years become, in your own head, "a decade"? Who misremembers four and a half years as being a decade?
It probably felt that long.
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
Tbh I could not accurately date the early part of what some laughingly call my career. I could just about put jobs in the right order.
To be fair you are not the Chancellor. Whenever her linked in was done - by her staff no less, apparently - she would have provided her dates of employment, maybe from an existing CV? Probably quite important to be accurate if you are hoping to be in charge of the nation’s finances.
Maybe a sensible personwould check as well if it’s correct before you tell your “staff” to release the info?
So if the info was taken from a CV then the CV was false and raises questions about who that CV was submitted to.
If the CV or source of info was incorrect why didn’t RR point out that the detail was wrong - she does check details right?
If it's on LinkedIn then it might well have been entered by Reeves' staff or even Labour's social media team. If written by herself, then having seen the complete state of many LinkedIn entries, I'm not surprised about mistakes. I doubt many people who are not actively using the platform for job seeking bother very much with it.
Unpopular opinion on here but I don't think it's fair to describe peace talks/deal in Ukraine as appeasement.
There was lots of fighting done to get to this point, and it looks like both Ukraine and Russia have suffered massive massive losses.
I can't pretend to know what's in Putins head, but if he is in anyway rationale he must see that further military adventures in Europe are going to be very costly. If a peace deal involved European troops in Ukraine to guarantee it, surely that further raises costs of breaking the rules. But its pretty shit for the Ukranians who are now part of Russia....
There will be more imperial expansion following a Ukraine “deal”, of course. Most regional opinion seems to expect this to be on a softer target. After a couple of years of rebuilding, and presumably following a US lifting of economic sanctions, Russia will have a go at extending its grip on Georgia, taking more of Moldova (though Geography makes that hard), completing Anschluss with Belarus and having a nibble at the Baltics to see what NATO does.
Trump has now signalled clearly that Eastern Europe is Russia’s sphere of influence and fair game. His remarkable pre-announcement of concessions to pretty much Russia’s entire wish list was truly the fart of the deal.
Conceding these things upfront works fine for Trump. All he's concerned about is doing a deal that looks like a win for him and his famous big boy negotiating skills. Since there was in practice no chance of NATO membership or a return to 2014 borders it's better for him that this is already known. Otherwise expectations might run away and it could look like he's been bested in the talks when it emerges it's not happening. He can't have that.
He wants to come out of negotiations looking like he's been tough and shrewd. So what I foresee is Putin floating something outrageously biased towards Russia and Trump beating him back to something still excellent for Russia but looking ok by comparison. I expect this to be choreographed between the two of them. There'll be some 'threats' from Trump that will 'force' Putin to accept less than he has said he wants. But what he'll be getting will be most satisfactory from his point of view.
One of their presenters, Martin Howie, remarked that LGBTQ+ includes "PAEDOS". It's strange to see the old tropes from 25 years ago bubbling up again in these places, alongside the common racist ones they think they can get away with.
We have rare GBN apology, and 1200 initial complaints to OFOCM, followed by the Suburban Samurai jumping on the wagon (correctly, for once, imo).
I think Howie is headed for the exit. Obviously the dictionary down his trousers covering his butt is "but I was making a joke", as it always is.
I have just had my first go at Civ 7 - what a disappointment! Where to start?. The aim of the game is to take a civilisation from beginning to a conclusion. Now you have a jump to another civilisation twice. In terms of visual quality the detail of the landscape is superb but it is sometimes difficult to see what each tile is for. Also the workers have disappeared so you have no choice on what to build. It seems that linking units has gone so you cannot for example protect a settler with an archer. Also gone are waves hitting the shore. So unless a substantial upgrade is coming it's back to Civ6.
The three Civs thing was the main reason it wasn't something I was going to get immediately (even if time and money permitted). It just seems antithetical to the game's general approach.
They've taken on a lot from other series. The city cap from Age of Wonders 4, the crisis from Stellaris, the ages from Humankind (apparently, I've not played that last one). But I wonder if that means Civ VII has lost its own appeal.
Why is Phillipson being put in the frame for VaaT on Private Schools?
It was a well trained policy and a firm manifesto commitment. Didn't Starmer and Reeves write that?
The issue is that she decided to to start it mid academic year despite being warned nobody was ready for the resultant changes particularly the state sector.
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
Someone is gunning for her internally, clearly. Wonder who?
Streeting going for the Chancellorship perhaps?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h I'm also not sure how that happens innocently. How does four and a half years become, in your own head, "a decade"? Who misremembers four and a half years as being a decade?
It probably felt that long.
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
Tbh I could not accurately date the early part of what some laughingly call my career. I could just about put jobs in the right order.
To be fair you are not the Chancellor. Whenever her linked in was done - by her staff no less, apparently - she would have provided her dates of employment, maybe from an existing CV? Probably quite important to be accurate if you are hoping to be in charge of the nation’s finances.
Maybe a sensible personwould check as well if it’s correct before you tell your “staff” to release the info?
So if the info was taken from a CV then the CV was false and raises questions about who that CV was submitted to.
If the CV or source of info was incorrect why didn’t RR point out that the detail was wrong - she does check details right?
If it's on LinkedIn then it might well have been entered by Reeves' staff or even Labour's social media team. If written by herself, then having seen the complete state of many LinkedIn entries, I'm not surprised about mistakes. I doubt many people who are not actively using the platform for job seeking bother very much with it.
The point is that the staff - if they entered the info must have got the info from somewhere rather than plucking it from their backsides - the only source they could ultimately get this info from accurately is the person themselves and they would most likely fire over a copy of their CV to the staff inputting the Data.
I’ve had “staff” do my LinkedIn in the past as well as websites when in senior roles and ultimately running a bank - I made damned sure anything that went out in my name was accurate.
If the Chancellor cannot be arsed to check the accuracy of info about them in the public domain then it’s not a good look.
I have just had my first go at Civ 7 - what a disappointment! Where to start?. The aim of the game is to take a civilisation from beginning to a conclusion. Now you have a jump to another civilisation twice. In terms of visual quality the detail of the landscape is superb but it is sometimes difficult to see what each tile is for. Also the workers have disappeared so you have no choice on what to build. It seems that linking units has gone so you cannot for example protect a settler with an archer. Also gone are waves hitting the shore. So unless a substantial upgrade is coming it's back to Civ6.
Civ 7 Is basically unfinished. Absolute joke that they released it like that.
If they said they were banning subsidies on these things, then OK. Free market rulez & all that. But forcing the grid to bury cables? Banning battery storage? Every policy here is going to raise bills, not lower them!
It seems that if you’re pro-development the only party you can reasonably vote for right now (no matter how flawed) is the Labour Party.
What is the rationale for banning battery storage ? Inefficiency ? Safety ?
A indirect way of nobbling solar and wind, I guess. Same with making new electricity transmission more expensive by burying cables.
I am not one of these eco loons who demand net zero now, but I can see the sense in moving away from oil and gas as quickly as possible and we should facilitate it as soon as possible without fucking our economy.
I do not get what the motivation is to nobble solar and wind. It is a part of a balanced energy portfolio
Umm, I think that is enough to make you an eco loon in the eyes of folk like Luckyguy1983. Especially given that literally nobody is demanding net zero now.
The problem with Energy production PLCs is the senior leadership who appear to only be interested in how much they can trouser in bonuses and share options before they get paid off. So no Energy company seems to have a vision beyond the share price in the next 3-5 years. All this delaying investment, reverse-ferreting, just results in a massive increase in costs and years of delay. Projects just end up being re-engineered several times over but delivered once.
Sounds exactly like Governments who are only interested in what ever will get them reelected in 3-5 years.
Similar issue, though at least they want to get re-elected rather than planning for their exit.
Really? It seems to me that one of the main preoccupations with senior politicians is what they will be doing once the electorate twig how useless they are and throw them out. This applies to all parties across the political spectrum.
Why is Phillipson being put in the frame for VaaT on Private Schools?
It was a well trained policy and a firm manifesto commitment. Didn't Starmer and Reeves write that?
The issue is that she decided to to start it mid academic year despite being warned nobody was ready for the resultant changes particularly the state sector.
Shame about Brigitte, much better speaker than Rachel. Looks OK, too.
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
Someone is gunning for her internally, clearly. Wonder who?
Streeting going for the Chancellorship perhaps?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h I'm also not sure how that happens innocently. How does four and a half years become, in your own head, "a decade"? Who misremembers four and a half years as being a decade?
It probably felt that long.
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
Tbh I could not accurately date the early part of what some laughingly call my career. I could just about put jobs in the right order.
To be fair you are not the Chancellor. Whenever her linked in was done - by her staff no less, apparently - she would have provided her dates of employment, maybe from an existing CV? Probably quite important to be accurate if you are hoping to be in charge of the nation’s finances.
Maybe a sensible personwould check as well if it’s correct before you tell your “staff” to release the info?
So if the info was taken from a CV then the CV was false and raises questions about who that CV was submitted to.
If the CV or source of info was incorrect why didn’t RR point out that the detail was wrong - she does check details right?
If it's on LinkedIn then it might well have been entered by Reeves' staff or even Labour's social media team. If written by herself, then having seen the complete state of many LinkedIn entries, I'm not surprised about mistakes. I doubt many people who are not actively using the platform for job seeking bother very much with it.
All sorts of ways for things to change unintentionally. "I worked at X plc in the 1980s" could refer to e.g. 4 years but be easily misread by someone else as "during/for the 1980s" and end up 1980-1989 once edited.
One of their presenters, Martin Howie, remarked that LGBTQ+ includes "PAEDOS". It's strange to see the old tropes from 25 years ago bubbling up again in these places, alongside the common racist ones they think they can get away with.
We have rare GBN apology, and 1200 initial complaints to OFOCM, followed by the Suburban Samurai jumping on the wagon (correctly, for once, imo).
I think Howie is headed for the exit. Obviously the dictionary down his trousers covering his butt is "but I was making a joke", as it always is.
His explanation. A fairly extended exercise in triangulation (imo). And a counterpoint from the first person who raised the complaint, which goes into the detail.
One of their presenters, Martin Howie, remarked that LGBTQ+ includes "PAEDOS". It's strange to see the old tropes from 25 years ago bubbling up again in these places, alongside the common racist ones they think they can get away with.
We have rare GBN apology, and 1200 initial complaints to OFOCM, followed by the Suburban Samurai jumping on the wagon (correctly, for once, imo).
I think Howie is headed for the exit. Obviously the dictionary down his trousers covering his butt is "but I was making a joke", as it always is.
His explanation. A fairly extended exercise in triangulation (imo). And a counterpoint from the first person who raised the complaint, which goes into the detail.
BBC going big on Reeves exaggerating her time at BOE and something to do with expenses….
Two stories at the top of the BBC news site on Reeves, based on BBC investigations, one on exaggerations about her time at BoE and one on possibly dodgy expenses claims when she was at HBOS. It's a pretty devastating set of headlines. I think it may carry more weight than all the previous "Labour scandals" that fizzled out (dressgate etc.).
Someone is gunning for her internally, clearly. Wonder who?
Streeting going for the Chancellorship perhaps?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h I'm also not sure how that happens innocently. How does four and a half years become, in your own head, "a decade"? Who misremembers four and a half years as being a decade?
It probably felt that long.
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
Tbh I could not accurately date the early part of what some laughingly call my career. I could just about put jobs in the right order.
To be fair you are not the Chancellor. Whenever her linked in was done - by her staff no less, apparently - she would have provided her dates of employment, maybe from an existing CV? Probably quite important to be accurate if you are hoping to be in charge of the nation’s finances.
Maybe a sensible personwould check as well if it’s correct before you tell your “staff” to release the info?
So if the info was taken from a CV then the CV was false and raises questions about who that CV was submitted to.
If the CV or source of info was incorrect why didn’t RR point out that the detail was wrong - she does check details right?
If it's on LinkedIn then it might well have been entered by Reeves' staff or even Labour's social media team. If written by herself, then having seen the complete state of many LinkedIn entries, I'm not surprised about mistakes. I doubt many people who are not actively using the platform for job seeking bother very much with it.
The point is that the staff - if they entered the info must have got the info from somewhere rather than plucking it from their backsides - the only source they could ultimately get this info from accurately is the person themselves and they would most likely fire over a copy of their CV to the staff inputting the Data.
I’ve had “staff” do my LinkedIn in the past as well as websites when in senior roles and ultimately running a bank - I made damned sure anything that went out in my name was accurate.
If the Chancellor cannot be arsed to check the accuracy of info about them in the public domain then it’s not a good look.
You are right. Errors should have been caught by Reeves or by Labour (or by Tories at CCHQ given she was an Opposition frontbencher) but they weren't and my guess (or one of my guesses) is that few take LinkedIn seriously. Click around LinkedIn and take a look.
I have just had my first go at Civ 7 - what a disappointment! Where to start?. The aim of the game is to take a civilisation from beginning to a conclusion. Now you have a jump to another civilisation twice. In terms of visual quality the detail of the landscape is superb but it is sometimes difficult to see what each tile is for. Also the workers have disappeared so you have no choice on what to build. It seems that linking units has gone so you cannot for example protect a settler with an archer. Also gone are waves hitting the shore. So unless a substantial upgrade is coming it's back to Civ6.
One of their presenters, Martin Howie, remarked that LGBTQ+ includes "PAEDOS". It's strange to see the old tropes from 25 years ago bubbling up again in these places, alongside the common racist ones they think they can get away with.
We have rare GBN apology, and 1200 initial complaints to OFOCM, followed by the Suburban Samurai jumping on the wagon (correctly, for once, imo).
I think Howie is headed for the exit. Obviously the dictionary down his trousers covering his butt is "but I was making a joke", as it always is.
His explanation. A fairly extended exercise in triangulation (imo). And a counterpoint from the first person who raised the complaint, which goes into the detail.
The paper review that won't put you to sleep (like the others). Join the all-star comedy cast for an intelligent and insightful look at tomorrow's headlines
There was an interesting contribution from the former head of MI6 on Today this morning.
He made a number of comments, expressing concern about Trump giving the prize to his negotiating partner before things started, as he did to the Taliban in Afghanistan. He feared a repeat on the sovereignty of Ukraine.
His further comment was that Europe was not in a position to replace the assistance given by the US because none of us had adequate Air power or logistics. Which, he commented, reflected very badly on our defence priorities in recent decades.
Don’t know if he is right about this, Russia’s airforce is something of a joke, but he seemed very well informed, unsurprisingly given his previous position.
One of their presenters, Martin Howie, remarked that LGBTQ+ includes "PAEDOS". It's strange to see the old tropes from 25 years ago bubbling up again in these places, alongside the common racist ones they think they can get away with.
We have rare GBN apology, and 1200 initial complaints to OFOCM, followed by the Suburban Samurai jumping on the wagon (correctly, for once, imo).
I think Howie is headed for the exit. Obviously the dictionary down his trousers covering his butt is "but I was making a joke", as it always is.
His explanation. A fairly extended exercise in triangulation (imo). And a counterpoint from the first person who raised the complaint, which goes into the detail.
The paper review that won't put you to sleep (like the others). Join the all-star comedy cast for an intelligent and insightful look at tomorrow's headlines
Yep. I have to admit I have never watched it so only going on ow it is advertised and what others say about it. But a great deal of comedy trivialises serious topics. Not sue why that should be a criticism specifically directed at this one.
Why is Phillipson being put in the frame for VaaT on Private Schools?
It was a well trained policy and a firm manifesto commitment. Didn't Starmer and Reeves write that?
The issue is that she decided to to start it mid academic year despite being warned nobody was ready for the resultant changes particularly the state sector.
I think it makes sense to start it in January, that way some will switch mid year and others at the end of the academic year, rather than all in one go. It might actually make it easier for the state system to absorb any switchers. But in any case, people move schools midyear all the time - I've done it, one of our kids did it twice - the system is set up to deal with it.
Reading the BBC about Reeves brings something to mind that I've thought a lot about. One quote "most of the first decade of her career at the Bank of England". And then "I spent the best part of a decade as an economist at the Bank of England." Are either of those phrases actually that innacurate?
I muse on the meaning of 'most'. And also the common use of decimate.
I propose that the common use of the two words is out of line with the dictionary definition. Decimate is to reduce by 10 % (from the barbaric Roman punishment meted out to poorly performing units). Yet common use would suggest a far higher loss than 10%.
Similarly when I here 'most' (as in for example 'most people love pineapple on pizza') I think of 80-90% of people when the reality is it can mean 52%. As in 52% of those who voted voted for Brexit. Yet to say most people voted for Brexit feels wrong.
There was an interesting contribution from the former head of MI6 on Today this morning.
He made a number of comments, expressing concern about Trump giving the prize to his negotiating partner before things started, as he did to the Taliban in Afghanistan. He feared a repeat on the sovereignty of Ukraine.
His further comment was that Europe was not in a position to replace the assistance given by the US because none of us had adequate Air power or logistics. Which, he commented, reflected very badly on our defence priorities in recent decades.
Don’t know if he is right about this, Russia’s airforce is something of a joke, but he seemed very well informed, unsurprisingly given his previous position.
I think he said he hadn’t read Art of the Deal. Startling since I though part of his job was to know the mindset of Britain’s enemies.
Why is Phillipson being put in the frame for VaaT on Private Schools?
It was a well trained policy and a firm manifesto commitment. Didn't Starmer and Reeves write that?
The issue is that she decided to to start it mid academic year despite being warned nobody was ready for the resultant changes particularly the state sector.
I think it makes sense to start it in January, that way some will switch mid year and others at the end of the academic year, rather than all in one go. It might actually make it easier for the state system to absorb any switchers. But in any case, people move schools midyear all the time - I've done it, one of our kids did it twice - the system is set up to deal with it.
I was at 8 schools and mostly changed mid year when I was in primary school but not in secondary.
In army schools such coming and going was routine.
One of their presenters, Martin Howie, remarked that LGBTQ+ includes "PAEDOS". It's strange to see the old tropes from 25 years ago bubbling up again in these places, alongside the common racist ones they think they can get away with.
We have rare GBN apology, and 1200 initial complaints to OFOCM, followed by the Suburban Samurai jumping on the wagon (correctly, for once, imo).
I think Howie is headed for the exit. Obviously the dictionary down his trousers covering his butt is "but I was making a joke", as it always is.
His explanation. A fairly extended exercise in triangulation (imo). And a counterpoint from the first person who raised the complaint, which goes into the detail.
The paper review that won't put you to sleep (like the others). Join the all-star comedy cast for an intelligent and insightful look at tomorrow's headlines
Yep. I have to admit I have never watched it so only going on ow it is advertised and what others say about it. But a great deal of comedy trivialises serious topics. Not sue why that should be a criticism specifically directed at this one.
I fess up to watching it occasionally, BUT only after channel-hopping if I find the Beeb and SKY paper reviewers boring. I didn't watch the Howie episode in question, which I believe was a few weeks ago.
There was an interesting contribution from the former head of MI6 on Today this morning.
He made a number of comments, expressing concern about Trump giving the prize to his negotiating partner before things started, as he did to the Taliban in Afghanistan. He feared a repeat on the sovereignty of Ukraine.
His further comment was that Europe was not in a position to replace the assistance given by the US because none of us had adequate Air power or logistics. Which, he commented, reflected very badly on our defence priorities in recent decades.
Don’t know if he is right about this, Russia’s airforce is something of a joke, but he seemed very well informed, unsurprisingly given his previous position.
I think he said he hadn’t read Art of the Deal. Startling since I though part of his job was to know the mindset of Britain’s enemies.
Viewcode: Good morning CoPilot. I have a question for you. Can you help me please?
CoPilot: Good morning! I'm here to help. What's your question? Let's dive in!
Viewcode: I have recieved the following request: "I need a [redacted] calculation for [redacted]. The expected change would be a reduction in [redacted] from [redacted] to [redacted]. We have [redacted] participating and they are [redacted]." Please give me the code to do this calculation in the SAS language.
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you. Can you do that again, this time in the Stata language please?
CoPilot:gives code
Viewcode: Thank you CoPilot
(goes to lunch)
It's alright for some. I tried to get chatgpt to write some fairly basic milling tool paths in Heidenhain conversational (a slightly obscure but quite well designed language, mainly used by older CNC kit). Even after a lengthy conversation about how the syntax worked, the code it wrote did approximately the correct maths equations but didn't match up the variable numbers (variables are numbered rather than named in this world) between blocks so the code didn't stand a chance of working and would have been more effort to fix than to write from scratch.
There was an interesting contribution from the former head of MI6 on Today this morning.
He made a number of comments, expressing concern about Trump giving the prize to his negotiating partner before things started, as he did to the Taliban in Afghanistan. He feared a repeat on the sovereignty of Ukraine.
His further comment was that Europe was not in a position to replace the assistance given by the US because none of us had adequate Air power or logistics. Which, he commented, reflected very badly on our defence priorities in recent decades.
Don’t know if he is right about this, Russia’s airforce is something of a joke, but he seemed very well informed, unsurprisingly given his previous position.
Did he mean simply shipping armaments by air into Poland? Or surveillance flights?
Reading the BBC about Reeves brings something to mind that I've thought a lot about. One quote "most of the first decade of her career at the Bank of England". And then "I spent the best part of a decade as an economist at the Bank of England." Are either of those phrases actually that innacurate?
I muse on the meaning of 'most'. And also the common use of decimate.
I propose that the common use of the two words is out of line with the dictionary definition. Decimate is to reduce by 10 % (from the barbaric Roman punishment meted out to poorly performing units). Yet common use would suggest a far higher loss than 10%.
Similarly when I here 'most' (as in for example 'most people love pineapple on pizza') I think of 80-90% of people when the reality is it can mean 52%. As in 52% of those who voted voted for Brexit. Yet to say most people voted for Brexit feels wrong.
* kill, destroy, or remove a large proportion of: "the inhabitants of the country had been decimated" drastically reduce the strength or effectiveness of (something): "public transport has been decimated"
historical * kill one in every ten of (a group of people, originally a mutinous Roman legion) as a punishment for the whole group: "the man who is to determine whether it be necessary to decimate a large body of mutineers"
I note a Democrat congresswoman is going to try and introduce a bill for... wait for it... reparations.
Vance, Rubio or one of Trump's sprogs is going to walk it in 2028 if they keep this up.
The DNC Conference meeting last week should be enough evidence to see them out of power for a generation, doubling down on every reason they lost last year.
"We are in a moment of anti-Blackness on steroids and we refuse to be silent," Pressley said. "We will not back down in our pursuit of racial justice."
Perhaps we can get that dickhead Lord Hermer on the case to get us involved in chipping in.
There was an interesting contribution from the former head of MI6 on Today this morning.
He made a number of comments, expressing concern about Trump giving the prize to his negotiating partner before things started, as he did to the Taliban in Afghanistan. He feared a repeat on the sovereignty of Ukraine.
His further comment was that Europe was not in a position to replace the assistance given by the US because none of us had adequate Air power or logistics. Which, he commented, reflected very badly on our defence priorities in recent decades.
Don’t know if he is right about this, Russia’s airforce is something of a joke, but he seemed very well informed, unsurprisingly given his previous position.
Did he mean simply shipping armaments by air into Poland? Or surveillance flights?
I think (it wasn’t gone into in detail) he meant that NATO trains and deploys itself under the cover of air superiority but that superiority is almost entirely contingent on US involvement because no one else has enough planes. But he might have been talking about lifting capacity as well where this would be equally true.
Reading the BBC about Reeves brings something to mind that I've thought a lot about. One quote "most of the first decade of her career at the Bank of England". And then "I spent the best part of a decade as an economist at the Bank of England." Are either of those phrases actually that innacurate?
I muse on the meaning of 'most'. And also the common use of decimate.
I propose that the common use of the two words is out of line with the dictionary definition. Decimate is to reduce by 10 % (from the barbaric Roman punishment meted out to poorly performing units). Yet common use would suggest a far higher loss than 10%.
Similarly when I here 'most' (as in for example 'most people love pineapple on pizza') I think of 80-90% of people when the reality is it can mean 52%. As in 52% of those who voted voted for Brexit. Yet to say most people voted for Brexit feels wrong.
I can't be the only one thinking this.
Depends on the matter under discussion. For polling:
The vast majority: 85% and up Most: 65% and up More voted for than not: 50% and up
But for work history, anything less than 7.5 years isn't "most of a decade". 6.5 to 7.5 is "much of the decade". 4.5 to 6.5 is "half a decade". 3.5-4.5 is "a few years". 1.5 - 3.5 is "a couple of years" and 0 - 1.5 is "fuck all".
Reading the BBC about Reeves brings something to mind that I've thought a lot about. One quote "most of the first decade of her career at the Bank of England". And then "I spent the best part of a decade as an economist at the Bank of England." Are either of those phrases actually that innacurate?
I muse on the meaning of 'most'. And also the common use of decimate.
I propose that the common use of the two words is out of line with the dictionary definition. Decimate is to reduce by 10 % (from the barbaric Roman punishment meted out to poorly performing units). Yet common use would suggest a far higher loss than 10%.
Similarly when I here 'most' (as in for example 'most people love pineapple on pizza') I think of 80-90% of people when the reality is it can mean 52%. As in 52% of those who voted voted for Brexit. Yet to say most people voted for Brexit feels wrong.
Reading the BBC about Reeves brings something to mind that I've thought a lot about. One quote "most of the first decade of her career at the Bank of England". And then "I spent the best part of a decade as an economist at the Bank of England." Are either of those phrases actually that innacurate?
I muse on the meaning of 'most'. And also the common use of decimate.
I propose that the common use of the two words is out of line with the dictionary definition. Decimate is to reduce by 10 % (from the barbaric Roman punishment meted out to poorly performing units). Yet common use would suggest a far higher loss than 10%.
Similarly when I here 'most' (as in for example 'most people love pineapple on pizza') I think of 80-90% of people when the reality is it can mean 52%. As in 52% of those who voted voted for Brexit. Yet to say most people voted for Brexit feels wrong.
I can't be the only one thinking this.
Yes "most" implies by a distance. To me it does anyway.
There was an interesting contribution from the former head of MI6 on Today this morning.
He made a number of comments, expressing concern about Trump giving the prize to his negotiating partner before things started, as he did to the Taliban in Afghanistan. He feared a repeat on the sovereignty of Ukraine.
His further comment was that Europe was not in a position to replace the assistance given by the US because none of us had adequate Air power or logistics. Which, he commented, reflected very badly on our defence priorities in recent decades.
Don’t know if he is right about this, Russia’s airforce is something of a joke, but he seemed very well informed, unsurprisingly given his previous position.
I think he said he hadn’t read Art of the Deal. Startling since I though part of his job was to know the mindset of Britain’s enemies.
Reading Art of the Deal is only useful for understanding Trump if you believe Trump has ever read it.
I note a Democrat congresswoman is going to try and introduce a bill for... wait for it... reparations.
Vance, Rubio or one of Trump's sprogs is going to walk it in 2028 if they keep this up.
The DNC Conference meeting last week should be enough evidence to see them out of power for a generation, doubling down on every reason they lost last year.
Possibly the best ever takedown of the US “Deep State”, vindication for what DOGE are doing, and confirmation that USAID was basically the CIA doing what the CIA were told not to do for the last couple of decades.
I note a Democrat congresswoman is going to try and introduce a bill for... wait for it... reparations.
Vance, Rubio or one of Trump's sprogs is going to walk it in 2028 if they keep this up.
The DNC Conference meeting last week should be enough evidence to see them out of power for a generation, doubling down on every reason they lost last year.
I note a Democrat congresswoman is going to try and introduce a bill for... wait for it... reparations.
Vance, Rubio or one of Trump's sprogs is going to walk it in 2028 if they keep this up.
The DNC Conference meeting last week should be enough evidence to see them out of power for a generation, doubling down on every reason they lost last year.
Possibly the best ever takedown of the US “Deep State”, vindication for what DOGE are doing, and confirmation that USAID was basically the CIA doing what the CIA were told not to do for the last couple of decades.
But before his stints in government and as a pundit, Benz appears to have been a pseudonymous alt-right content creator who courted and interacted with white nationalists and posted videos espousing racist conspiracy theories, according to recordings, livestreams and blog posts reviewed by NBC News.
The pseudonym, Frame Game, posted videos and participated in podcasts and livestreams during the rise of the alt-right following Donald Trump’s election. Frame Game avoided showing his face in his videos or appearances, during which he pushed a variety of far-right narratives including the “Great Replacement Theory” that posits the white race is being eradicated in America for politics and profits. In others, Frame Game said he was a white identitarian, railed against the idea of diversity and made montages urging white viewers to unite under the banner of race.
In interviews with white nationalists, Frame Game blamed Jews for “controlling the media” and for the decline of the white race. “If you were to remove the Jewish influence on the West,” he said in one video, “white people would not face the threat of white genocide that they currently do.”
I have just had my first go at Civ 7 - what a disappointment! Where to start?. The aim of the game is to take a civilisation from beginning to a conclusion. Now you have a jump to another civilisation twice. In terms of visual quality the detail of the landscape is superb but it is sometimes difficult to see what each tile is for. Also the workers have disappeared so you have no choice on what to build. It seems that linking units has gone so you cannot for example protect a settler with an archer. Also gone are waves hitting the shore. So unless a substantial upgrade is coming it's back to Civ6.
Possibly the best ever takedown of the US “Deep State”, vindication for what DOGE are doing, and confirmation that USAID was basically the CIA doing what the CIA were told not to do for the last couple of decades.
So what’s the consensus, is this all weak sauce re Reeves or is she potentially in trouble?
I think the CV stuff on its own is unhelpful given the previous reporting on the topic, but it doesn’t feel particularly fatal?
The expenses stuff feels like there’s more to come out, but difficult to assess at this point.
The main issue is whether it gets to a point where she has to go for being a “distraction” under the combined weight of everything, I suspect? It doesn’t look to me like any huge smoking gun.
Possibly the best ever takedown of the US “Deep State”, vindication for what DOGE are doing, and confirmation that USAID was basically the CIA doing what the CIA were told not to do for the last couple of decades.
But before his stints in government and as a pundit, Benz appears to have been a pseudonymous alt-right content creator who courted and interacted with white nationalists and posted videos espousing racist conspiracy theories, according to recordings, livestreams and blog posts reviewed by NBC News.
The pseudonym, Frame Game, posted videos and participated in podcasts and livestreams during the rise of the alt-right following Donald Trump’s election. Frame Game avoided showing his face in his videos or appearances, during which he pushed a variety of far-right narratives including the “Great Replacement Theory” that posits the white race is being eradicated in America for politics and profits. In others, Frame Game said he was a white identitarian, railed against the idea of diversity and made montages urging white viewers to unite under the banner of race.
In interviews with white nationalists, Frame Game blamed Jews for “controlling the media” and for the decline of the white race. “If you were to remove the Jewish influence on the West,” he said in one video, “white people would not face the threat of white genocide that they currently do.”
So again attacking the person rather than his arguments.
Who cares if he was shitposting online a decade ago?
Meanwhile, today he has a shitload of evidence of public sector mismanagement of funds.
I note a Democrat congresswoman is going to try and introduce a bill for... wait for it... reparations.
Vance, Rubio or one of Trump's sprogs is going to walk it in 2028 if they keep this up.
The DNC Conference meeting last week should be enough evidence to see them out of power for a generation, doubling down on every reason they lost last year.
Possibly the best ever takedown of the US “Deep State”, vindication for what DOGE are doing, and confirmation that USAID was basically the CIA doing what the CIA were told not to do for the last couple of decades.
So what’s the consensus, is this all weak sauce re Reeves or is she potentially in trouble?
I think the CV stuff on its own is unhelpful given the previous reporting on the topic, but it doesn’t feel particularly fatal?
The expenses stuff feels like there’s more to come out, but difficult to assess at this point.
The main issue is whether it gets to a point where she has to go for being a “distraction” under the combined weight of everything, I suspect? It doesn’t look to me like any huge smoking gun.
I'd have thought fiddling your expenses just meant that she'd fit in really well as a MP? For a long time it was part of the tacit agreement (the pay will be low for the public's consumption but the expenses are really generous and not under scrutiny...)
Possibly the best ever takedown of the US “Deep State”, vindication for what DOGE are doing, and confirmation that USAID was basically the CIA doing what the CIA were told not to do for the last couple of decades.
Warning: this video features Joe Rogan and Mike Benz, and is 202 minutes long.
It turns out that Rory Stewart’s wife’s charity was also getting millions from USAID.
Yes, that's how foreign aid often works. You give money to a charity to do charitable work.
And it’s totally incidental that these charities appear to be vastly overpopulated with close relatives of the politicians involved in the funding decisions.
I note a Democrat congresswoman is going to try and introduce a bill for... wait for it... reparations.
Vance, Rubio or one of Trump's sprogs is going to walk it in 2028 if they keep this up.
The DNC Conference meeting last week should be enough evidence to see them out of power for a generation, doubling down on every reason they lost last year.
So what’s the consensus, is this all weak sauce re Reeves or is she potentially in trouble?
I think the CV stuff on its own is unhelpful given the previous reporting on the topic, but it doesn’t feel particularly fatal?
The expenses stuff feels like there’s more to come out, but difficult to assess at this point.
The main issue is whether it gets to a point where she has to go for being a “distraction” under the combined weight of everything, I suspect? It doesn’t look to me like any huge smoking gun.
I agree the CV stuff doesn't seem fatal, but it's an additional problem on top of the expenses stuff. The expenses stuff seems potentially fatal (cf. Louise Haigh). The BBC story feels like they hit a wall and couldn't find anything more out, but someone somewhere may now emerge with more details, which could go either way for Reeves.
Comments
I worry for Reeves because in exactly five hours I begin my short break away.
Trump has now signalled clearly that Eastern Europe is Russia’s sphere of influence and fair game. His remarkable pre-announcement of concessions to pretty much Russia’s entire wish list was truly the fart of the deal.
#SubtleJoke
All excuses, Trump promised this, he promised to sort cost of living. The people who matter to Trump, the voters, will care far more about that than worrying about war in the future over Ukraine
The Democrats should be all over this.
Sad
Some shitty firms demand a compromise agreement without an enhanced payoff, my Dad had a client who got angry when he advised him not to sign the compromise agreement because they were only being offered statutory.
"HR said you'd be difficult!!"
7.5 million to 6.5 million in a Govt term is not decisive enough.
It needs to be coming down on average 3, and really 4, times as quickly - close to a million per annum.
The consolation is that it is ticking down at a time of year of high demand, so it may speed up once we reach spring, and it is early days.
KemiKaze: "At this rate he will be 80 by the time his Government has shortened waiting lists by much."
- Viewcode: Good morning CoPilot. I have a question for you. Can you help me please?
- CoPilot: Good morning! I'm here to help. What's your question? Let's dive in!
- Viewcode: I have recieved the following request: "I need a [redacted] calculation for [redacted]. The expected change would be a reduction in [redacted] from [redacted] to [redacted]. We have [redacted] participating and they are [redacted]." Please give me the code to do this calculation in the SAS language.
- CoPilot: gives code
- Viewcode: Thank you. Can you do that again, this time in the Stata language please?
- CoPilot: gives code
- Viewcode: Thank you CoPilot
(goes to lunch)https://www.itv.com/news/2025-02-13/waiting-list-for-routine-hospital-treatment-falls-for-fourth-month-in-a-row
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cd9x22dj423t
Your boss learns how to use AI ... early retirement.
Maybe a sensible personwould check as well if it’s correct before you tell your “staff” to release the info?
So if the info was taken from a CV then the CV was false and raises questions about who that CV was submitted to.
If the CV or source of info was incorrect why didn’t RR point out that the detail was wrong - she does check details right?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y6n8z6z2do
He wants to come out of negotiations looking like he's been tough and shrewd. So what I foresee is Putin floating something outrageously biased towards Russia and Trump beating him back to something still excellent for Russia but looking ok by comparison. I expect this to be choreographed between the two of them. There'll be some 'threats' from Trump that will 'force' Putin to accept less than he has said he wants. But what he'll be getting will be most satisfactory from his point of view.
One of their presenters, Martin Howie, remarked that LGBTQ+ includes "PAEDOS". It's strange to see the old tropes from 25 years ago bubbling up again in these places, alongside the common racist ones they think they can get away with.
We have rare GBN apology, and 1200 initial complaints to OFOCM, followed by the Suburban Samurai jumping on the wagon (correctly, for once, imo).
I think Howie is headed for the exit. Obviously the dictionary down his trousers covering his butt is "but I was making a joke", as it always is.
Clip:
https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:wy4ufhy7swsmq7uekin7oces/post/3lgxntedjrs2z
Background:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8j7g3e38jo
They've taken on a lot from other series. The city cap from Age of Wonders 4, the crisis from Stellaris, the ages from Humankind (apparently, I've not played that last one). But I wonder if that means Civ VII has lost its own appeal.
Others may differ.
It was a well trained policy and a firm manifesto commitment. Didn't Starmer and Reeves write that?
Now a 13-episode first series on Disney+. Set in 4ABY, it chronicles the...
I’ve had “staff” do my LinkedIn in the past as well as websites when in senior roles and ultimately running a bank - I made damned sure anything that went out in my name was accurate.
If the Chancellor cannot be arsed to check the accuracy of info about them in the public domain then it’s not a good look.
Train drivers on the Elizabeth line are to strike on four separate days over the coming weeks in a dispute over pay.
Members of the train drivers’ union Aslef will take industrial action on Thursday 27 February, Saturday 1 March, Saturday 8 March and Monday 10 March.
But as Boulay says checking is needed.
His explanation. A fairly extended exercise in triangulation (imo). And a counterpoint from the first person who raised the complaint, which goes into the detail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNlHTOWTKuc
IMO the core issue here is his deliberate trivialisation of the whole question.
Which best describes your feelings about Trump ?
Watch Headliners on GB News
https://www.gbnews.com/shows/headliners/
The paper review that won't put you to sleep (like the others). Join the all-star comedy cast for an intelligent and insightful look at tomorrow's headlines
https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1889968586028110300
He made a number of comments, expressing concern about Trump giving the prize to his negotiating partner before things started, as he did to the Taliban in Afghanistan.
He feared a repeat on the sovereignty of Ukraine.
His further comment was that Europe was not in a position to replace the assistance given by the US because none of us had adequate Air power or logistics. Which, he commented, reflected very badly on our defence priorities in recent decades.
Don’t know if he is right about this, Russia’s airforce is something of a joke, but he seemed very well informed, unsurprisingly given his previous position.
Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flightless_bird#List_of_flightless_birds
https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/case-to-head-up-team-barrow/
I muse on the meaning of 'most'. And also the common use of decimate.
I propose that the common use of the two words is out of line with the dictionary definition. Decimate is to reduce by 10 % (from the barbaric Roman punishment meted out to poorly performing units). Yet common use would suggest a far higher loss than 10%.
Similarly when I here 'most' (as in for example 'most people love pineapple on pizza') I think of 80-90% of people when the reality is it can mean 52%. As in 52% of those who voted voted for Brexit. Yet to say most people voted for Brexit feels wrong.
I can't be the only one thinking this.
(I’m still looking at actions from the likes of Rubio and Kellogg, rather than what is being said by anyone to their own audience).
Startling since I though part of his job was to know the mindset of Britain’s enemies.
In army schools such coming and going was routine.
Vance, Rubio or one of Trump's sprogs is going to walk it in 2028 if they keep this up.
Even after a lengthy conversation about how the syntax worked, the code it wrote did approximately the correct maths equations but didn't match up the variable numbers (variables are numbered rather than named in this world) between blocks so the code didn't stand a chance of working and would have been more effort to fix than to write from scratch.
decimate (verb) · decimates (third person present) · decimated (past tense) · decimated (past participle) · decimating (present participle)
* kill, destroy, or remove a large proportion of:
"the inhabitants of the country had been decimated"
drastically reduce the strength or effectiveness of (something):
"public transport has been decimated"
historical
* kill one in every ten of (a group of people, originally a mutinous Roman legion) as a punishment for the whole group:
"the man who is to determine whether it be necessary to decimate a large body of mutineers"
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/02/dnc-meeting/681548/
"We are in a moment of anti-Blackness on steroids and we refuse to be silent," Pressley said. "We will not back down in our pursuit of racial justice."
Perhaps we can get that dickhead Lord Hermer on the case to get us involved in chipping in.
A bird watching friend encouraged me to take up the hobby when I was going through some issues, I wish I had the time.
He described it as train spotting but with birds.
But he might have been talking about lifting capacity as well where this would be equally true.
The vast majority: 85% and up
Most: 65% and up
More voted for than not: 50% and up
But for work history, anything less than 7.5 years isn't "most of a decade". 6.5 to 7.5 is "much of the decade". 4.5 to 6.5 is "half a decade". 3.5-4.5 is "a few years". 1.5 - 3.5 is "a couple of years" and 0 - 1.5 is "fuck all".
https://what-if.xkcd.com/84/
Whereas all those things Musk and Trump are doing are AOK. And anyway they’re only doing them cos the Dems made them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPPc8OVNngg
Warning: this video features Joe Rogan and Mike Benz, and is 202 minutes long.
The nu-right just have it even more strongly than most.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/michael-benz-rising-voice-conservative-criticism-online-censorship-rcna119213
But before his stints in government and as a pundit, Benz appears to have been a pseudonymous alt-right content creator who courted and interacted with white nationalists and posted videos espousing racist conspiracy theories, according to recordings, livestreams and blog posts reviewed by NBC News.
The pseudonym, Frame Game, posted videos and participated in podcasts and livestreams during the rise of the alt-right following Donald Trump’s election. Frame Game avoided showing his face in his videos or appearances, during which he pushed a variety of far-right narratives including the “Great Replacement Theory” that posits the white race is being eradicated in America for politics and profits. In others, Frame Game said he was a white identitarian, railed against the idea of diversity and made montages urging white viewers to unite under the banner of race.
In interviews with white nationalists, Frame Game blamed Jews for “controlling the media” and for the decline of the white race. “If you were to remove the Jewish influence on the West,” he said in one video, “white people would not face the threat of white genocide that they currently do.”
I think the CV stuff on its own is unhelpful given the previous reporting on the topic, but it doesn’t feel particularly fatal?
The expenses stuff feels like there’s more to come out, but difficult to assess at this point.
The main issue is whether it gets to a point where she has to go for being a “distraction” under the combined weight of everything, I suspect? It doesn’t look to me like any huge smoking gun.
Who cares if he was shitposting online a decade ago?
Meanwhile, today he has a shitload of evidence of public sector mismanagement of funds.
There needs to be a British DOGE.
Hegseth said he wanted to end woke and make the US a more effective fighting force.
His first two actions are to change the preferred pronouns of an army base and retreat from the biggest hot war on Earth.
What a pussy...