But: a) everyone who was anyone in the celebrity sphere of New York knew Trump b) everyone who was anyone in the celebrity sphere of New York knew Epstein
It's not damming either way.
In one email dated April 2, 2011, which CNN has independently reviewed, Epstein emailed Maxwell: “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.. (REDACTED) spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned. Police chief. etc. im 75 % there.”
Maxwell responded: “I have been thinking about that…”
So Epstein and Maxwell are annoyed as Hell that Trump’s not playing their game.
I just passed @JohnHealey_MP in Derby Gate with his security detail. Something in his manner, his expression, the way he walked, told me that he is preparing a leadership bid. Don’t ask me to explain. Long exposure to politics gives you a funny instinct for these things.
He could tell by the way he used his walk He's a candidate, no time to talk
Will the last pub standing please remember to turn the pumps off.
LBC has confidential information from their top Treasury mole that booze might go up, like in every budget since Mike Yarwood used to joke about 5p on fags and 10p on booze.
Rachel Reeves might yet foil their cunning plan to reduce alcohol duty by dropping to a lower band.
The Jeremy Hunt legacy.
So much stuff is now 3.4%. It’s not worth drinking. Not that I ever drunk Fosters
3.4% suits me just fine tbh. I am pretty sure in my early drinking days in the 70s that's what beer was generally.
Yes but the 70s were the nadir of beer. That's when and why CAMRA was formed. When I first started drinking in the late 80s/early 90s I remember Boddington's was 3.8%, and that was at the bottom end of the scale. I'm with Taz: 3.4% is basically shandy.
Will the last pub standing please remember to turn the pumps off.
LBC has confidential information from their top Treasury mole that booze might go up, like in every budget since Mike Yarwood used to joke about 5p on fags and 10p on booze.
Rachel Reeves might yet foil their cunning plan to reduce alcohol duty by dropping to a lower band.
The Jeremy Hunt legacy.
So much stuff is now 3.4%. It’s not worth drinking. Not that I ever drunk Fosters
Diluted Kangaroo Pee.
That's a grotesque slander.
There is no evidence they dilute it.
I thought they were just diluting the alcohol, which presumably exists to distract from the taste, to 3.4%.
It will taste worse because you will be sober and able to sense it for a longer time.
They can just adjust the sugar level. They work to a tolerance anyway. 3.4% alcohol beer could be + or - 0.5%
So this piss could be 2.9% and still sold legally
This ±0.5% stuff is horseshit, Carlsberg can probably brew to a tolerance of at least a tenth of that. They probably deliberately brew at 2.95 and tell everyone it's 3.4
I only knew this as there was a case or a story where someone was complaining that one beer, pitched at 3.8%, was basically 3.4% and so should be cheaper.
I just passed @JohnHealey_MP in Derby Gate with his security detail. Something in his manner, his expression, the way he walked, told me that he is preparing a leadership bid. Don’t ask me to explain. Long exposure to politics gives you a funny instinct for these things.
I just passed Daniel Hannan in Westminster. Something in his manner, his expression, the way he walked, told me that he's an idiot. Don't ask me to explain. I just have a funny instinct for these things.
He isn't an idiot, liberal rightwinger and Brexiteer yes but not an idiot
I think you're taking my little bit of satire rather too seriously.
All the major brands of beer are now universally terrible. They are all owned by 2-3 mega corps and combination of cost engineering and reduction in the alchol content for tax reasons mean they are utter piss (and those continential lagers brewed under licence taste normally nothing like their originals available in home country).
On the plus side, Gordon Browns tax breaks for micro-breweries has led to a revolution in the availability of craft beers.
What a relief it is then that the independent brewing trade is thriving!
I was going to say, i dont drink beers/lagers and wouldnt really know one from another, but every time i go into a pub there's a plethora of independent brews, even places like 'Spoons have a wide selection of specialist ales.
I know people here will be sniffy at Spoons but it is not bad. It is good at what it does. The curry there on a Thursday is decent for the money.
Decent beers, decent price, and you can play the Wetherspoons game too
All the major brands of beer are now universally terrible. They are all owned by 2-3 mega corps and combination of cost engineering and reduction in the alchol content for tax reasons mean they are utter piss (and those continential lagers brewed under licence taste normally nothing like their originals available in home country).
On the plus side, Gordon Browns tax breaks for micro-breweries has led to a revolution in the availability of craft beers.
What a relief it is then that the independent brewing trade is thriving!
I was going to say, i dont drink beers/lagers and wouldnt really know one from another, but every time i go into a pub there's a plethora of independent brews, even places like 'Spoons have a wide selection of specialist ales.
I know people here will be sniffy at Spoons but it is not bad. It is good at what it does. The curry there on a Thursday is decent for the money.
Decent beers, decent price, and you can play the Wetherspoons game too
Getting rid of the Sunday roast was unforgivable though....
...One of those films that could only have been directed by a woman...
I'm pretty sure that's not true. Although I find that one of the films I thought of as a similar counter-example (Saint Maud) actually was directed by a woman (Rose Glass). I'm not going to list the others that were directed by men, because it's depressing and frankly ick.
Take a look at it. It's an uninhibitedness in performance that I've only ever seen achieved by a female director. It's not just to do with baring her body it's being prepared to show herself with absolutely nothing held back . Go and see it and let me know what you think
Michael Caine has signed on with ElevenLabs and has added his voice to their newly launched 'Iconic Marketplace.' Other voices available; Maya Angelou, Sir Laurence Olivier, Richard Feynman, Art Garfunkel, Liza Minnelli, Judy Garland, and John Wayne.
Evens in 2026 is very good value. A leadership challenge in 2026 is nailed on after the local/Assembly elections if it doesn't happen before then, and although there is a chance one may be initiated in November 2025 it looks too late now for that to reach its conclusion before the new year, so Starmer wont be replaced until then.
I would read recent history differently to TSE. Recent history (in 2016) shows that Labour MPs ARE willing to initiate leadership challenges in extreme circumstances. The fact that the challenge of Owen Smith failed was only down to a historical anomaly where the dominant view of Corbyn amongst the membership was completely out of line with the views of MPs. That isn't the case this time, Starmer is seen to be an total electoral liability across all wings of the party.
How about 2008 to 2010 when lots of plots to oust Gordon Brown came to nothing?
We're in very different territory now. The situation under Brown wasn't as electorally dire or indeed existential for Labour, for Labour still eventually ended up with 29% of the vote and 258 seats in 2010. MPs will see no prospect of anything even close to that if Starmer remains as PM. I think MPs will act and that odds of evens on 2026 are extremely generous.
But: a) everyone who was anyone in the celebrity sphere of New York knew Trump b) everyone who was anyone in the celebrity sphere of New York knew Epstein
It's not damming either way.
In one email dated April 2, 2011, which CNN has independently reviewed, Epstein emailed Maxwell: “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.. (REDACTED) spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned. Police chief. etc. im 75 % there.”
Maxwell responded: “I have been thinking about that…”
What does that mean? Professor Hawkins was a visitor on the infamous island..
All the major brands of beer are now universally terrible. They are all owned by 2-3 mega corps and combination of cost engineering and reduction in the alchol content for tax reasons mean they are utter piss (and those continential lagers brewed under licence taste normally nothing like their originals available in home country).
On the plus side, Gordon Browns tax breaks for micro-breweries has led to a revolution in the availability of craft beers.
What a relief it is then that the independent brewing trade is thriving!
I was going to say, i dont drink beers/lagers and wouldnt really know one from another, but every time i go into a pub there's a plethora of independent brews, even places like 'Spoons have a wide selection of specialist ales.
I thought Rishi(?) had ended Brown's tax break for small brewers?
Will the last pub standing please remember to turn the pumps off.
LBC has confidential information from their top Treasury mole that booze might go up, like in every budget since Mike Yarwood used to joke about 5p on fags and 10p on booze.
Rachel Reeves might yet foil their cunning plan to reduce alcohol duty by dropping to a lower band.
The Jeremy Hunt legacy.
So much stuff is now 3.4%. It’s not worth drinking. Not that I ever drunk Fosters
3.4% suits me just fine tbh. I am pretty sure in my early drinking days in the 70s that's what beer was generally.
Mild was probably probably lower than that. 3.2 ?
The beers (Brew XI, Springfield) and the lager (Carling) would be around 4.1% but I’m talking eighties.
Of course prior to 1989 it wasn't a requirement to label beers with their strength, so we'll probably never know how strong or week the 70s beers were. My guess is pretty weak overall.
In my opinion (memory) beer strength has definitely gone up, in particular lagers which used to be generally weak. I remember when London Pride was considered a strong bitter at 4.1% and ESB used to be stronger but still 4.?%. ESB according to the internet is now 5.5%. Prior to the percentages appearing you used to be given the specific gravity on the pumps. This must have been before fermentation and as the tax was based upon this figure presumably nearly all would have been converted to alcohol to get the best return for the tax. So the specific gravity would be a good guide to the strength and even calculable unless the beer was sweet (yuk).
So in answer to my own question and according to Google AI a 1.045 - 1.050 sp gravity will produce a 5% beer. I'm sure people like @Taz who produce their own stuff could be more informative than me.
Will the last pub standing please remember to turn the pumps off.
LBC has confidential information from their top Treasury mole that booze might go up, like in every budget since Mike Yarwood used to joke about 5p on fags and 10p on booze.
Rachel Reeves might yet foil their cunning plan to reduce alcohol duty by dropping to a lower band.
The Jeremy Hunt legacy.
So much stuff is now 3.4%. It’s not worth drinking. Not that I ever drunk Fosters
3.4% suits me just fine tbh. I am pretty sure in my early drinking days in the 70s that's what beer was generally.
Mild was probably probably lower than that. 3.2 ?
The beers (Brew XI, Springfield) and the lager (Carling) would be around 4.1% but I’m talking eighties.
Of course prior to 1989 it wasn't a requirement to label beers with their strength, so we'll probably never know how strong or week the 70s beers were. My guess is pretty weak overall.
In my opinion (memory) beer strength has definitely gone up, in particular lagers which used to be generally weak. I remember when London Pride was considered a strong bitter at 4.1% and ESB used to be stronger but still 4.?%. ESB according to the internet is now 5.5%. Prior to the percentages appearing you used to be given the specific gravity on the pumps. This must have been before fermentation and as the tax was based upon this figure presumably nearly all would have been converted to alcohol to get the best return for the tax. So the specific gravity would be a good guide to the strength and even calculable unless the beer was sweet (yuk).
So in answer to my own question and according to Google AI a 1.045 - 1.050 sp gravity will produce a 5% beer. I'm sure people like @Taz who produce their own stuff could be more informative than me.
It should do. You subtract your start point from your end point to get the %.
But: a) everyone who was anyone in the celebrity sphere of New York knew Trump b) everyone who was anyone in the celebrity sphere of New York knew Epstein
It's not damming either way.
In one email dated April 2, 2011, which CNN has independently reviewed, Epstein emailed Maxwell: “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.. (REDACTED) spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned. Police chief. etc. im 75 % there.”
Maxwell responded: “I have been thinking about that…”
So Epstein and Maxwell are annoyed as Hell that Trump’s not playing their game.
"Reflects well on Trump that their kompromat didn't work" - Fox News.
Being completely shameless and immune to the law will do that for you - bit like this guy with the CIA sex tape : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukarno
All the major brands of beer are now universally terrible. They are all owned by 2-3 mega corps and combination of cost engineering and reduction in the alchol content for tax reasons mean they are utter piss (and those continential lagers brewed under licence taste normally nothing like their originals available in home country).
On the plus side, Gordon Browns tax breaks for micro-breweries has led to a revolution in the availability of craft beers.
What a relief it is then that the independent brewing trade is thriving!
I was going to say, i dont drink beers/lagers and wouldnt really know one from another, but every time i go into a pub there's a plethora of independent brews, even places like 'Spoons have a wide selection of specialist ales.
I know people here will be sniffy at Spoons but it is not bad. It is good at what it does. The curry there on a Thursday is decent for the money.
Decent beers, decent price, and you can play the Wetherspoons game too
Same with Ryanair. It is nobody's idea of a luxury experience, but it does what it does well and is often extraordinarily cheap. The same type of people tend to despise both companies (while often using them secretly), but their millions of customers take not the slightest bit of notice.
Comments
He's a candidate, no time to talk
https://bsky.app/profile/dennycarter.bsky.social/post/3m5gsqwu67s2r
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c2dr3z9egljt
Decent beers, decent price, and you can play the Wetherspoons game too
BBC News - Italy probes claims that tourists paid to shoot at civilians in Bosnian war
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3epygq5272o
NEW THREAD
I use this tool to calculate my final %.
https://www.brewersfriend.com/abv-calculator/
Being completely shameless and immune to the law will do that for you - bit like this guy with the CIA sex tape : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukarno