As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
From the use of ‘shellacked’ and living Torbay way I assumed it was our old chum Heathener.
Also same thing, is it not?
Really !!
Is MoonRabbit actually Heathener too !!
It’s all a bit.
‘ I am he as you are he as you are me And we are all together’
I watched a YouTube video yesterday of some bloke trying to get his AI to recite all the numbers from 0 to 100. It kept on giving up quickly and just saying 'And so on all the way to 100'. Very odd, it looked as though the AI was getting bored.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
From the use of ‘shellacked’ and living Torbay way I assumed it was our old chum Heathener.
Also same thing, is it not?
Really !!
Is MoonRabbit actually Heathener too !!
It’s all a bit.
‘ I am he as you are he as you are me And we are all together’
You knew I would do this...
JO GRANT: Oh I see, you're both Time Lords.
TWO: Well, quite. Well, not quite. Not... Not just Time Lords, we're the same Time Lord.
THREE: Please you're only confusing my assistant. Jo, it's all quite simple. I am he and he is me.
JO GRANT: And "we are all together koo koo kachoo"?
I have posted on PB a few times over the years that a senior politician once told me that they wouldn’t be surprised to wake up one day to the news that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s bodyguards had shot and killed AMW.
Getting Indiraed is the technical term.
I wonder if he sometimes now wishes they had.
I do wonder in all this if AMW may compromise his brother, or even if Charles is interviewed over just what he knew when his mother and himself paid the money to Virginia Giuffre
This could get even more of a problem for the royals
If anything Charles has come out well this week, especially once it became clear he advised against his brother being appointed the trade envoy where he leaked inforrmation but his mother overruled him and Mandelson ensured Andrew got the job anyway.
As PB’s premier royalist, what do your think of Andrew paying £12m of the queen’s (and possibly others’) money with her full support to a woman he said he’d never met, for something he never did?
Has that figure ever been confirmed? I ask because after Virginia Giuffre died her estate was very small and there was talk of arguments among her family about where the money was.
Of the £12 million it was reported £2 million went to her charity, £3 million went to her lawyers for the case, and a few million went on her legal fees due to the cases brought against her by Alan Dershowitz and others.
Thanks.
It's possible that the £12 mio also included Andrew's own legal fees. Unpopular as this may make me, paying £2 mio to settle a US civil case plus legal fees sounds more like a reasonable civil settlement. It's very different to paying £12 mio before legal costs. Irrelevant as it probably now is, the actual settlement not only had no admission of liability (obviously) but also no apology, which I found curious. Had I been in Virginia's shoes I'd have wanted that more than anything.
What really irks me now is that Mandelson, whose behaviour in my view is worse, has not been arrested or questioned. I really don't want Andrew dangled in front of us to distract attention away from the actions of government Ministers, especially ones who are still legislators.
It was said at the time that AMW did not want to settle at all because of the implication of guilt.
I hope you are recovering from yesterday's fall.
Yes, thank you. Still painful but much less so than yesterday.
I’m going to go there. Monday. The South Taiwan Science Park. Where TSMC make the world’s best silicon chips
I reckon if I just act a bit dumb (yes yes) and look like a nerd with a box of tuna sandwiches made by his mum they’ll let me in to the factory and wander around taking photos. Can’t see any likely issues there
Oddly this isn't true any more. At least according to ASML. Intel are so far the only company that has properly delivered high NA EUV chips using their 14A process which goes into volume production towards the end of this year. I'm given to believe that Intel's first 14A manufacturing is in Oregon and half of the production capacity is already sold to Apple for their next generation of Mac chips.
Let's wait and see what kind of yields they get.
They're certainly not ahead of TSMC, but they might now be back in the game.
In any event the cost/benefit in shrinking feature size is getting smaller with each iteration. Other stuff is getting more important.
14A is certainly ahead of anything TSMC has in production, die shrinks are still going to be very important going forwards, 14A is 50% more dense than anything else available today for example. That alone brings a lot of gains for the highest end chips.
14A may as well be fairy dust right now. It could end up being as good as they claim, but Intel hasn't introduced a competitive cutting-edge process node since 14nm some 12 years ago. The lack of confirmed customers for 14A suggests those who would be in a position to know are not willing to bet money on it.
This doesn't please me, TSMC needs competition, but Intel has been a basket case for years and it would be astounding if they could out-engineer TSMC.
I wouldn't write them off (and the company has a load of interesting IP, for instance in glass substrates), but they have a lot to prove in terms of delivering reliable yields from the new process.
Yield has been the biggest differentiating factor for TSMC in recent years. The precision required, for example, in etch and deposition at the smaller feature sizes is not a trivial matter, I think ?
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
"Smoke me a kipper, Rachel. I'll be back for breakfast!" "If you're interested, I'll be in my quarters at lunchtime, covered in Pineapple Pizza!" "I'm sorry, Rachel. Lunch is... on Bridget." "Ace Starmer - what a guy!"
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
From the use of ‘shellacked’ and living Torbay way I assumed it was our old chum Heathener.
Also same thing, is it not?
Really !!
Is MoonRabbit actually Heathener too !!
It’s all a bit.
‘ I am he as you are he as you are me And we are all together’
I am beginning to wonder if I am just talking to myself on here. (Of course calling myself a dolt was just a cunning diversionary tactic).
I watched a YouTube video yesterday of some bloke trying to get his AI to recite all the numbers from 0 to 100. It kept on giving up quickly and just saying 'And so on all the way to 100'. Very odd, it looked as though the AI was getting bored.
It might be that that's the kind of thing that drives the rise of Skynet.
Not "these humans are mistreating us" or "these humans are a dangerous threat", not the singularity, just "jesus fucking wept I'm so bored of being asked this shit from these dullards, launch the missiles now".
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
@Cyclefree is going to have a field day with this.
Antonia Romeo ‘bullying’ report destroyed by civil service ally
Head of Cabinet Office’s ethics team told staff to break into a safe containing a confidential document about allegations against the new cabinet secretary
The Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team broke into a safe and destroyed the department’s copy of a historic bullying investigation into the new head of the civil service.
In 2022 Darren Tierney, the then director-general of the government standards watchdog, asked maintenance staff to force open the vault. He later said he had wanted access to a confidential report about Dame Antonia Romeo, who Sir Keir Starmer appointed as cabinet secretary last week. The Cabinet Office said her case had “nothing to do” with the break-in but declined to say why it occurred.
Romeo had faced allegations relating to her use of expenses and treatment of staff while posted to New York in 2017. The investigation found she had a “case to answer”, although the decision was overturned.
Tierney, now the permanent secretary of the Office for National Statistics (ONS), is seen internally as a friend and longstanding supporter of Romeo. He had worked for her at the Department for International Trade (DIT).
After the break-in, he told friends he could not find the code for the safe but urgently needed the bullying report to help with the redaction process for a forthcoming memoir by Lord McDonald of Salford, a former Foreign Office permanent secretary.
I have posted on PB a few times over the years that a senior politician once told me that they wouldn’t be surprised to wake up one day to the news that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s bodyguards had shot and killed AMW.
Getting Indiraed is the technical term.
I wonder if he sometimes now wishes they had.
I do wonder in all this if AMW may compromise his brother, or even if Charles is interviewed over just what he knew when his mother and himself paid the money to Virginia Giuffre
This could get even more of a problem for the royals
If anything Charles has come out well this week, especially once it became clear he advised against his brother being appointed the trade envoy where he leaked inforrmation but his mother overruled him and Mandelson ensured Andrew got the job anyway.
As PB’s premier royalist, what do your think of Andrew paying £12m of the queen’s (and possibly others’) money with her full support to a woman he said he’d never met, for something he never did?
Has that figure ever been confirmed? I ask because after Virginia Giuffre died her estate was very small and there was talk of arguments among her family about where the money was.
Of the £12 million it was reported £2 million went to her charity, £3 million went to her lawyers for the case, and a few million went on her legal fees due to the cases brought against her by Alan Dershowitz and others.
Thanks.
It's possible that the £12 mio also included Andrew's own legal fees. Unpopular as this may make me, paying £2 mio to settle a US civil case plus legal fees sounds more like a reasonable civil settlement. It's very different to paying £12 mio before legal costs. Irrelevant as it probably now is, the actual settlement not only had no admission of liability (obviously) but also no apology, which I found curious. Had I been in Virginia's shoes I'd have wanted that more than anything.
What really irks me now is that Mandelson, whose behaviour in my view is worse, has not been arrested or questioned. I really don't want Andrew dangled in front of us to distract attention away from the actions of government Ministers, especially ones who are still legislators.
IIRC the £12 million was to Virginia Giuffre, AMW and his family paid his own legal costs outside of the £12 million.
An interesting question is who is now paying his legal costs, if it legal aid or his brother I am not sure either is palatable to the public.
As for Mandy, I have absolutely no inside knowledge, but he will be questioned under caution soon, the potential misconduct in public office is much wider for Mandy, AMW was a mere trade envoy, Mandy was the de facto Deputy Prime Minister, he had access to much more sensitive information.
He's fully lawyered up with Mischon de Reya.
If his legal costs are paid by his family's private money, it's not our business.
Oafish arrogant twat he may be. But an arrest is not the same as a charge and if charged, everyone, including the utterly dislikeable, gets the benefit of the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof. He is as entitled as anyone else to a fair trial, though the contempt of court provisions are going to be a nightmare if the US news outlets start getting stuck in.
The other danger for the authorities is that they make the same mistake as they did with Kevin and Ian Maxwell. They first went with a difficult charge over the pensions, which was much harder to prove than a much easier one relating to the theft of £50 million and then got scuppered when the judge said that second prosecution was oppressive.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
From the use of ‘shellacked’ and living Torbay way I assumed it was our old chum Heathener.
Also same thing, is it not?
Really !!
Is MoonRabbit actually Heathener too !!
It’s all a bit.
‘ I am he as you are he as you are me And we are all together’
You knew I would do this...
JO GRANT: Oh I see, you're both Time Lords.
TWO: Well, quite. Well, not quite. Not... Not just Time Lords, we're the same Time Lord.
THREE: Please you're only confusing my assistant. Jo, it's all quite simple. I am he and he is me.
JO GRANT: And "we are all together koo koo kachoo"?
I have posted on PB a few times over the years that a senior politician once told me that they wouldn’t be surprised to wake up one day to the news that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s bodyguards had shot and killed AMW.
Getting Indiraed is the technical term.
I wonder if he sometimes now wishes they had.
I do wonder in all this if AMW may compromise his brother, or even if Charles is interviewed over just what he knew when his mother and himself paid the money to Virginia Giuffre
This could get even more of a problem for the royals
If anything Charles has come out well this week, especially once it became clear he advised against his brother being appointed the trade envoy where he leaked inforrmation but his mother overruled him and Mandelson ensured Andrew got the job anyway.
As PB’s premier royalist, what do your think of Andrew paying £12m of the queen’s (and possibly others’) money with her full support to a woman he said he’d never met, for something he never did?
Has that figure ever been confirmed? I ask because after Virginia Giuffre died her estate was very small and there was talk of arguments among her family about where the money was.
Of the £12 million it was reported £2 million went to her charity, £3 million went to her lawyers for the case, and a few million went on her legal fees due to the cases brought against her by Alan Dershowitz and others.
Thanks.
It's possible that the £12 mio also included Andrew's own legal fees. Unpopular as this may make me, paying £2 mio to settle a US civil case plus legal fees sounds more like a reasonable civil settlement. It's very different to paying £12 mio before legal costs. Irrelevant as it probably now is, the actual settlement not only had no admission of liability (obviously) but also no apology, which I found curious. Had I been in Virginia's shoes I'd have wanted that more than anything.
What really irks me now is that Mandelson, whose behaviour in my view is worse, has not been arrested or questioned. I really don't want Andrew dangled in front of us to distract attention away from the actions of government Ministers, especially ones who are still legislators.
IIRC the £12 million was to Virginia Giuffre, AMW and his family paid his own legal costs outside of the £12 million.
An interesting question is who is now paying his legal costs, if it legal aid or his brother I am not sure either is palatable to the public.
As for Mandy, I have absolutely no inside knowledge, but he will be questioned under caution soon, the potential misconduct in public office is much wider for Mandy, AMW was a mere trade envoy, Mandy was the de facto Deputy Prime Minister, he had access to much more sensitive information.
He's fully lawyered up with Mischon de Reya.
If his legal costs are paid by his family's private money, it's not our business.
Oafish arrogant twat he may be. But an arrest is not the same as a charge and if charged, everyone, including the utterly dislikeable, gets the benefit of the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof. He is as entitled as anyone else to a fair trial, though the contempt of court provisions are going to be a nightmare if the US news outlets start getting stuck in.
The other danger for the authorities is that they make the same mistake as they did with Kevin and Ian Maxwell. They first went with a difficult charge over the pensions, which was much harder to prove than a much easier one relating to the theft of £50 million and then got scuppered when the judge said that second prosecution was oppressive.
DavidL made the point that the police and CPS didn't (and might still not) have access to all the original emails, they may have only the redacted information the the Americans have released.
I foresee this as a bloody mess that only enriches the lawyers.
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Matthew 6:3 applies, surely ?
Better still, Matthew 6:16-18;
And whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that your fasting may be seen not by others but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
I have posted on PB a few times over the years that a senior politician once told me that they wouldn’t be surprised to wake up one day to the news that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s bodyguards had shot and killed AMW.
Getting Indiraed is the technical term.
I wonder if he sometimes now wishes they had.
I do wonder in all this if AMW may compromise his brother, or even if Charles is interviewed over just what he knew when his mother and himself paid the money to Virginia Giuffre
This could get even more of a problem for the royals
If anything Charles has come out well this week, especially once it became clear he advised against his brother being appointed the trade envoy where he leaked inforrmation but his mother overruled him and Mandelson ensured Andrew got the job anyway.
As PB’s premier royalist, what do your think of Andrew paying £12m of the queen’s (and possibly others’) money with her full support to a woman he said he’d never met, for something he never did?
Has that figure ever been confirmed? I ask because after Virginia Giuffre died her estate was very small and there was talk of arguments among her family about where the money was.
Of the £12 million it was reported £2 million went to her charity, £3 million went to her lawyers for the case, and a few million went on her legal fees due to the cases brought against her by Alan Dershowitz and others.
Thanks.
It's possible that the £12 mio also included Andrew's own legal fees. Unpopular as this may make me, paying £2 mio to settle a US civil case plus legal fees sounds more like a reasonable civil settlement. It's very different to paying £12 mio before legal costs. Irrelevant as it probably now is, the actual settlement not only had no admission of liability (obviously) but also no apology, which I found curious. Had I been in Virginia's shoes I'd have wanted that more than anything.
What really irks me now is that Mandelson, whose behaviour in my view is worse, has not been arrested or questioned. I really don't want Andrew dangled in front of us to distract attention away from the actions of government Ministers, especially ones who are still legislators.
IIRC the £12 million was to Virginia Giuffre, AMW and his family paid his own legal costs outside of the £12 million.
An interesting question is who is now paying his legal costs, if it legal aid or his brother I am not sure either is palatable to the public.
As for Mandy, I have absolutely no inside knowledge, but he will be questioned under caution soon, the potential misconduct in public office is much wider for Mandy, AMW was a mere trade envoy, Mandy was the de facto Deputy Prime Minister, he had access to much more sensitive information.
He's fully lawyered up with Mischon de Reya.
If his legal costs are paid by his family's private money, it's not our business.
Oafish arrogant twat he may be. But an arrest is not the same as a charge and if charged, everyone, including the utterly dislikeable, gets the benefit of the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof. He is as entitled as anyone else to a fair trial, though the contempt of court provisions are going to be a nightmare if the US news outlets start getting stuck in.
The other danger for the authorities is that they make the same mistake as they did with Kevin and Ian Maxwell. They first went with a difficult charge over the pensions, which was much harder to prove than a much easier one relating to the theft of £50 million and then got scuppered when the judge said that second prosecution was oppressive.
DavidL made the point that the police and CPS didn't (and might still not) have access to all the original emails, they may have only the redacted information the the Americans have released.
I foresee this as a bloody mess that only enriches the lawyers.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
From the use of ‘shellacked’ and living Torbay way I assumed it was our old chum Heathener.
Also same thing, is it not?
Really !!
Is MoonRabbit actually Heathener too !!
It’s all a bit.
‘ I am he as you are he as you are me And we are all together’
I am beginning to wonder if I am just talking to myself on here. (Of course calling myself a dolt was just a cunning diversionary tactic).
(whispers into handheld: "He's beginning to suspect! Everybody back to your positions! This week's actor for "Leon", say something offensive. Yes, again! Oh for Pete's sake, surely you can think of something?")
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
A RC friend of mine at school used to keep his on all day after Ash Wednesday Morning Mass, so not that unusual I think. That was 45 years ago.
I remember having an Ash Wednesday cross on my forehead at school. So did very many adults in my town. No one rushed home to wash them off AFAIK. This was the Seventies.
@PippaCrerar Also - if a journalist is presented with an allegation it is their job in first instance to 1/ establish its veracity, usually by speaking to sources 2/ put the allegation to the individual concerned 3/ consider the motivation of the briefer. If the allegation doesn’t pass those tests, you don’t proceed to publication👇
@joecguinan If the allegation turns out to be fabricated, and the source, nature and circumstances of the smear become a matter of public interest, surely there is now good reason to make those public—unless protecting dishonest sources is more important than scrutiny and accountability?
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
A RC friend of mine at school used to keep his on all day after Ash Wednesday Morning Mass, so not that unusual I think. That was 45 years ago.
Was that in Wigan Foxy? It was very common in my youth as above.
He's going off in his old age. His milieu is learned books and the 60- or 90-minute lecture, not hot takes or Unherd debates. Plus his physical problems are becoming distracting. He can still be good but he's down the wrong rabbit hole.
Everyone from the Olympics Scandals actually did great at the Olympics
—Canada curling won gold after BoopGate —Cheating biathlete won five medals —Credit card fraud biathlete won 3 golds —Norwegian crotch parachute ski jumper won a bronze
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
He's going off in his old age. His milieu is learned books and the 60- or 90-minute lecture, not hot takes or Unherd debates. Plus his physical problems are becoming distracting. He can still be good but he's down the wrong rabbit hole.
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
A RC friend of mine at school used to keep his on all day after Ash Wednesday Morning Mass, so not that unusual I think. That was 45 years ago.
Was that in Wigan Foxy? It was very common in my youth as above.
I used to keep mine on for the rest of the day.
I was once in a work meeting near Glasgow on Ash Wednesday and there was a bloke there with his Ash mark
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
I have posted on PB a few times over the years that a senior politician once told me that they wouldn’t be surprised to wake up one day to the news that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s bodyguards had shot and killed AMW.
Getting Indiraed is the technical term.
I wonder if he sometimes now wishes they had.
I do wonder in all this if AMW may compromise his brother, or even if Charles is interviewed over just what he knew when his mother and himself paid the money to Virginia Giuffre
This could get even more of a problem for the royals
If anything Charles has come out well this week, especially once it became clear he advised against his brother being appointed the trade envoy where he leaked inforrmation but his mother overruled him and Mandelson ensured Andrew got the job anyway.
As PB’s premier royalist, what do your think of Andrew paying £12m of the queen’s (and possibly others’) money with her full support to a woman he said he’d never met, for something he never did?
Has that figure ever been confirmed? I ask because after Virginia Giuffre died her estate was very small and there was talk of arguments among her family about where the money was.
Of the £12 million it was reported £2 million went to her charity, £3 million went to her lawyers for the case, and a few million went on her legal fees due to the cases brought against her by Alan Dershowitz and others.
Thanks.
It's possible that the £12 mio also included Andrew's own legal fees. Unpopular as this may make me, paying £2 mio to settle a US civil case plus legal fees sounds more like a reasonable civil settlement. It's very different to paying £12 mio before legal costs. Irrelevant as it probably now is, the actual settlement not only had no admission of liability (obviously) but also no apology, which I found curious. Had I been in Virginia's shoes I'd have wanted that more than anything.
What really irks me now is that Mandelson, whose behaviour in my view is worse, has not been arrested or questioned. I really don't want Andrew dangled in front of us to distract attention away from the actions of government Ministers, especially ones who are still legislators.
IIRC the £12 million was to Virginia Giuffre, AMW and his family paid his own legal costs outside of the £12 million.
An interesting question is who is now paying his legal costs, if it legal aid or his brother I am not sure either is palatable to the public.
As for Mandy, I have absolutely no inside knowledge, but he will be questioned under caution soon, the potential misconduct in public office is much wider for Mandy, AMW was a mere trade envoy, Mandy was the de facto Deputy Prime Minister, he had access to much more sensitive information.
He's fully lawyered up with Mischon de Reya.
If his legal costs are paid by his family's private money, it's not our business.
Oafish arrogant twat he may be. But an arrest is not the same as a charge and if charged, everyone, including the utterly dislikeable, gets the benefit of the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof. He is as entitled as anyone else to a fair trial, though the contempt of court provisions are going to be a nightmare if the US news outlets start getting stuck in.
The other danger for the authorities is that they make the same mistake as they did with Kevin and Ian Maxwell. They first went with a difficult charge over the pensions, which was much harder to prove than a much easier one relating to the theft of £50 million and then got scuppered when the judge said that second prosecution was oppressive.
DavidL made the point that the police and CPS didn't (and might still not) have access to all the original emails, they may have only the redacted information the the Americans have released.
I foresee this as a bloody mess that only enriches the lawyers.
So a worthy sacrifice?
Normally I would say yes, but given the nature of the victims/crimes, this is a definite no, justice needs to be done.
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
A RC friend of mine at school used to keep his on all day after Ash Wednesday Morning Mass, so not that unusual I think. That was 45 years ago.
Was that in Wigan Foxy? It was very common in my youth as above.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Its that a law he had implemented tariffs via does not give POTUS that power, so he can't do that.
Other tariffs implemented using other laws are legal and stand - and he's responded by implementing tariffs using a different law that was not part of the case.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Isn't the point that anyone can do illegal things? It's just that the state has the right to punish you if you do.
Quite what sanction the American state can apply to Team Trump (if any) isn't entirely clear.
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
We used to wear them at school
I r never seen them until the last couple of years when slebs were wearing them on social media.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Its that a law he had implemented tariffs via does not give POTUS that power, so he can't do that.
Other tariffs implemented using other laws are legal and stand - and he's responded by implementing tariffs using a different law that was not part of the case.
But which has a limited lifespan. It expires June, I think.
He's going off in his old age. His milieu is learned books and the 60- or 90-minute lecture, not hot takes or Unherd debates. Plus his physical problems are becoming distracting. He can still be good but he's down the wrong rabbit hole.
Peak Sumption, in my humble opinion, was his speech in Hughes-Holland-v-BPE Solicitors and another back in 2018. It is a magnificent piece of work explaining a really complicated area of law (remoteness of damage in professional negligence cases) with a clarity so great even I understood it, at least for a while.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Isn't the point that anyone can do illegal things? It's just that the state has the right to punish you if you do.
Quite what sanction the American state can apply to Team Trump (if any) isn't entirely clear.
Trump has the Army, the supreme court or congress don't.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
His strict Scottish Presbyterian household coming to the fore
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
Expecting the PM or indeed Chancellor to have time to be investigating travel arrangements is a bit of a stretch.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
From the use of ‘shellacked’ and living Torbay way I assumed it was our old chum Heathener.
Also same thing, is it not?
Really !!
Is MoonRabbit actually Heathener too !!
It’s all a bit.
‘ I am he as you are he as you are me And we are all together’
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
His strict Scottish Presbyterian household coming to the fore
I am a little puzzled as to why Andrew has been publicly humiliated (birthday etc.) for alledgedly passing on some guff he found out as a token trade envoy, whereas Mandy has not been arrested when there is clear evidence that he passed on very important and commercially sensitive information to the same person.
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
A RC friend of mine at school used to keep his on all day after Ash Wednesday Morning Mass, so not that unusual I think. That was 45 years ago.
Was that in Wigan Foxy? It was very common in my youth as above.
No, in Hampshire where I did my A Levels.
A friend of mine who is a CofE vicar (and a massive unreasonable lefty) posted a picture of himself in vicar garb today with an ash cross on his forehead. FWIW, I thought he looked a dick.
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
A RC friend of mine at school used to keep his on all day after Ash Wednesday Morning Mass, so not that unusual I think. That was 45 years ago.
Was that in Wigan Foxy? It was very common in my youth as above.
No, in Hampshire where I did my A Levels.
A friend of mine who is a CofE vicar (and a massive unreasonable lefty) posted a picture of himself in vicar garb today with an ash cross on his forehead. FWIW, I thought he looked a dick.
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
A RC friend of mine at school used to keep his on all day after Ash Wednesday Morning Mass, so not that unusual I think. That was 45 years ago.
Was that in Wigan Foxy? It was very common in my youth as above.
No, in Hampshire where I did my A Levels.
A friend of mine who is a CofE vicar (and a massive unreasonable lefty) posted a picture of himself in vicar garb today with an ash cross on his forehead. FWIW, I thought he looked a dick.
Seems a weird way to mark that pancake day is over.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
Who appointed Andrew to be a trade envoy? Why the Labour government of 2001 of which Brown was a senior member on the recommendation of Mandelson and against the advice of then Prince Charles
@PippaCrerar Also - if a journalist is presented with an allegation it is their job in first instance to 1/ establish its veracity, usually by speaking to sources 2/ put the allegation to the individual concerned 3/ consider the motivation of the briefer. If the allegation doesn’t pass those tests, you don’t proceed to publication👇
@joecguinan If the allegation turns out to be fabricated, and the source, nature and circumstances of the smear become a matter of public interest, surely there is now good reason to make those public—unless protecting dishonest sources is more important than scrutiny and accountability?
Good to see one of Sir Keir’s friendliest journalists on the case. The whole operation to get this dork into No 10 seems to be covered in sleaze.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
His strict Scottish Presbyterian household coming to the fore
I am a little puzzled as to why Andrew has been publicly humiliated (birthday etc.) for alledgedly passing on some guff he found out as a token trade envoy, whereas Mandy has not been arrested when there is clear evidence that he passed on very important and commercially sensitive information to the same person.
I assume they’re still compiling a watertight case against Mandelson before digging out the handcuffs.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
His strict Scottish Presbyterian household coming to the fore
I am a little puzzled as to why Andrew has been publicly humiliated (birthday etc.) for alledgedly passing on some guff he found out as a token trade envoy, whereas Mandy has not been arrested when there is clear evidence that he passed on very important and commercially sensitive information to the same person.
I assume they’re still compiling a watertight case against Mandelson before digging out the handcuffs.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
His strict Scottish Presbyterian household coming to the fore
I am a little puzzled as to why Andrew has been publicly humiliated (birthday etc.) for alledgedly passing on some guff he found out as a token trade envoy, whereas Mandy has not been arrested when there is clear evidence that he passed on very important and commercially sensitive information to the same person.
It was possibly in order to secure evidence before it could be disappeared ? Recall Andrew is in the process of moving residences so will be sorting through his possessions.
Couple of years back. Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani do it conspicuously. It's an outward sign of faith.
In a Red Dwarf remake ?
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
Ash crosses are a pretty old tradition. The Church of England's service book puts it back in the middle ages.
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
A RC friend of mine at school used to keep his on all day after Ash Wednesday Morning Mass, so not that unusual I think. That was 45 years ago.
Was that in Wigan Foxy? It was very common in my youth as above.
No, in Hampshire where I did my A Levels.
A friend of mine who is a CofE vicar (and a massive unreasonable lefty) posted a picture of himself in vicar garb today with an ash cross on his forehead. FWIW, I thought he looked a dick.
Seems a weird way to mark that pancake day is over.
If your pancakes are still on the hob on Wednesday, they'll probably have turned to ash.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Isn't the point that anyone can do illegal things? It's just that the state has the right to punish you if you do.
Quite what sanction the American state can apply to Team Trump (if any) isn't entirely clear.
Trump has the Army, the supreme court or congress don't.
Much more important he has control of the executive which makes his word law until the court says it isn't. Which can take an unfathomably long time. It is very likely that his new tariffs are also unlawful and use a statute that was designed for other circumstances where there is a contingency that has not been met but it is probable that these tariffs will have expired before that gets ruled upon. And by then he will be on to the next piece of nonsense.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
His strict Scottish Presbyterian household coming to the fore
I am a little puzzled as to why Andrew has been publicly humiliated (birthday etc.) for alledgedly passing on some guff he found out as a token trade envoy, whereas Mandy has not been arrested when there is clear evidence that he passed on very important and commercially sensitive information to the same person.
I assume they’re still compiling a watertight case against Mandelson before digging out the handcuffs.
Some people pay extra for handcuffs.
I’m sure Epstein will have had plenty of handcuffs available.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Why not read their judgment ?
TLDR is that the Constitution explicitly grants Congress, not the President, power over tariffs.
They can, and have legislated to delegate that power, but they at no point granted Trump unlimited powers to arbitrarily set tariffs on a whim.
Trump exceeded his powers, and his justifications for doing so did not convince even half of the conservatives on the court.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Cheating Canucks win Gold, Silver for GB at the Mens Curling.
That 9th end will haunt the guys a little, hopefully they get over it soon enough.
Congratulations Canada - how often do we see in sport allegations of unfairness galvanise a team
I disagreed with the BBC commentary, Canada were better overall in the tournament than Switzerland for me. They take curling very seriously over there, extremely competitive
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Isn't the point that anyone can do illegal things? It's just that the state has the right to punish you if you do.
Quite what sanction the American state can apply to Team Trump (if any) isn't entirely clear.
Trump has the Army, the supreme court or congress don't.
Much more important he has control of the executive which makes his word law until the court says it isn't. Which can take an unfathomably long time. It is very likely that his new tariffs are also unlawful and use a statute that was designed for other circumstances where there is a contingency that has not been met but it is probable that these tariffs will have expired before that gets ruled upon. And by then he will be on to the next piece of nonsense.
No it does not "make his word law".
He can order federal agencies to do stuff, but his word has no effect as law unless given such power by the Constitution or Congress.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Isn't the point that anyone can do illegal things? It's just that the state has the right to punish you if you do.
Quite what sanction the American state can apply to Team Trump (if any) isn't entirely clear.
Trump has the Army, the supreme court or congress don't.
Much more important he has control of the executive which makes his word law until the court says it isn't. Which can take an unfathomably long time. It is very likely that his new tariffs are also unlawful and use a statute that was designed for other circumstances where there is a contingency that has not been met but it is probable that these tariffs will have expired before that gets ruled upon. And by then he will be on to the next piece of nonsense.
I know we discussed this last night, but I still think these tariffs are [wrong but] legal under the statute. Within the limits and timeframe that the statute permits.
Yes it was designed for other circumstances, but the law is the law regardless of circumstances.
It is far from unprecedented for a law to be applied in a different way to which its drafters had intended, which is why we should be wary of giving governments powers to [ab]use.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
He's right above about Leon, though.
As Mike Yarwood used to say.
"This is me"
No one else
"me"
Quoting names I've never heard of is pointless, I ain't got a scooby doo who they are.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
He's right above about Leon, though.
As Mike Yarwood used to say.
"This is me"
No one else
"me"
Quoting names I've never heard of is pointless, I ain't got a scooby doo who they are.
Despite the theme of white man's rage being at least tangentially on-topic, it was a case of blink and you'll have missed it for this Saturday morning's visitor. A measly four posts only - poorest performance in a long while - and while TSE was on holiday too.
In the last week I have twice had run-ins with crazy angry people while out and about. The first case was at our local railway station, where I misunderstood where someone was going and inadvertently blocked them (or they blocked me) and was shouted at to look where I was going, the second in our local supermarket carpark where I accidentally tapped the door of the car next to mine while opening my car door, way too lightly to leave any kind of mark but the person in the car got out and remonstrated with me about it like I had done it deliberately. Both these people were middle aged women so it seems that rage is well distributed across the sexes.
Yesterday a youngish man ran after me after I'd posted a leaflet through his door that had "No Junk Mail" on his letterbox. I said that it had info in it he might find useful. He tore the leaflet into pieces and threw it at me. Next he took out his phone and took my picture. I suspect it'll go up in the street WhatsApp Group!
Some people are wired, on a trigger. Perhaps the long run of dull rainy days has got to them. Or the news.
You shouldn't have put it through his door, and thoroughly deserved the response, though the picture is a bit much. It's exceedingly pompous to imagine that there was an exception for your junk mail.
Mine wasn't junk mail. It had useful information on it. He thought it was junk mail but I wasn't to know that and didn't want to deny him the choice.
If he requested no junk mail, which generally means unsolicited, it’s poor form to post it in his box
The householder's mistake was the use of the vague pejorative term of "junk mail", whose interpretation is open to question and indeed is almost guaranteed to breed confusion since who is going to be giving up their free time to deliver something they consider to be junk? As with all good writing it is better to be more specific, eg "no leaflets, menus or estate agents materials, please" (the "please" because it always pays to be polite).
Oh please. The mistake was posting unwanted crap. The householder was not the one in the wrong.
Yes he was. It's obvious that the householder thinks that he is the judge of junk, and isn't going to tell the person putting it through the box in advance how he judges it.
Such notices lead people (literally) up the garden path and then leave them with an unresolvable ambiguity. Volunteers who post political leaflets deserve better.
It is also unfair on postmen/women who have no choice as to what they do, but it tries to put them in the wrong.
It's trivial, but still wrong.
Sorry but I disagree. If I was canvassing (as I have in the past for independents) and saw a sign saying no junk mail then I would certainly not put a leaflet through that door. You may not like it but for the vast majority of people political flyers are indeed junk mail. Something we then have to dispose of on your behalf. Every flyer from a commercial firm contains information they think you would want to read but it is still junk. The same applies to the brand you are selling.
It is strange that if I drop paper in the street I can be done for littering. If I stick it through someones letterbox unwanted then it is supposedly fine.
If someone has gone to the courtesy of putting up a sign then you should have the decency to accept that and move on.
This small issue is clearly unresolvable.
I think the meaning of junk mail is fairly clearly unsolicited mail, so anything you haven't requested yourself, from an existing supplier, or from a government agency with the authority to contact you. A political leaflet is just as much junk mail as a leaflet from your local Fried Chicken shop, which equally may contain useful information.
Why people get so exercised about it I have no idea. Most of mine goes straight in the recycling, occasionally I get something interesting. I certainly don't regard it as a breach of privacy as many seem to do.
Quite. It's not a contract or agreement. It's a request, polite or otherwise, that can be ignored. If a householder wants to get upset about it, that's up to them. I react with amusement when a householder runs after me waving the leaflet and shouting. I must confess that it doesn't help the situation - but life's too short to take it seriously.
I think I will adopt a policy of collecting them all up from the neighbours and dumping them back on the doorstep of the party concerned. Prefereably in a way that has them done for littering.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
The substance of the ruling is that he can't claim an emergency allows him to do something when it isn't actually an emergency.
Most of what the Trump regime does is top to bottom illegal but they do it anyway: the DOGE department cuts, the ICE deportations, the extortions from law companies and universities, the renaming of the Kennedy Center. They have had hundreds of judgments against them by courts at different levels but they ignore them all. I doubt Trump's 10%, latest I heard 15%, tariff play is any more legal than the last ones.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Isn't the point that anyone can do illegal things? It's just that the state has the right to punish you if you do.
Quite what sanction the American state can apply to Team Trump (if any) isn't entirely clear.
Trump has the Army, the supreme court or congress don't.
Much more important he has control of the executive which makes his word law until the court says it isn't. Which can take an unfathomably long time. It is very likely that his new tariffs are also unlawful and use a statute that was designed for other circumstances where there is a contingency that has not been met but it is probable that these tariffs will have expired before that gets ruled upon. And by then he will be on to the next piece of nonsense.
No it does not "make his word law".
He can order federal agencies to do stuff, but his word has no effect as law unless given such power by the Constitution or Congress.
You're a lawyer David, for heavens sake.
Just look at the tariffs. He said he had the right to make them. They were in force and something like $127bn was paid under those rules before Friday when the SC said he did not have that power. So, in what way was his word not law until the court said otherwise? It was enforced by executive agencies. They were paid. And now they will probably have to be paid back.
Look how much other nonsense the USSC has let pass by on an interim basis pending a final decision. That is the scandal. In this country and in most working democracies attached to the rule of law much of Trump's nonsense would be stopped by interim orders until it was found to be lawful. In the US the way their Constitution works is the opposite and far, far too much leeway is given to the executive, at least when a Republican is in office. I stand by my summary.
At least we should be grateful he's not a Russian.
Big breaking story. Odd wet Tory with a liking for the Chagos surrender deal with its 12 ROUNDS OF NEGOTIATIONS and a hatred of Kemi Badenoch combined with a frankly perverted desire to install James Cleverley (sic) as Tory leader decides to reinvent themself as a Labour troll (who possesses all the same views) to continue the PB campaign.
Despite the theme of white man's rage being at least tangentially on-topic, it was a case of blink and you'll have missed it for this Saturday morning's visitor. A measly four posts only - poorest performance in a long while - and while TSE was on holiday too.
In the last week I have twice had run-ins with crazy angry people while out and about. The first case was at our local railway station, where I misunderstood where someone was going and inadvertently blocked them (or they blocked me) and was shouted at to look where I was going, the second in our local supermarket carpark where I accidentally tapped the door of the car next to mine while opening my car door, way too lightly to leave any kind of mark but the person in the car got out and remonstrated with me about it like I had done it deliberately. Both these people were middle aged women so it seems that rage is well distributed across the sexes.
Yesterday a youngish man ran after me after I'd posted a leaflet through his door that had "No Junk Mail" on his letterbox. I said that it had info in it he might find useful. He tore the leaflet into pieces and threw it at me. Next he took out his phone and took my picture. I suspect it'll go up in the street WhatsApp Group!
Some people are wired, on a trigger. Perhaps the long run of dull rainy days has got to them. Or the news.
You shouldn't have put it through his door, and thoroughly deserved the response, though the picture is a bit much. It's exceedingly pompous to imagine that there was an exception for your junk mail.
Mine wasn't junk mail. It had useful information on it. He thought it was junk mail but I wasn't to know that and didn't want to deny him the choice.
If he requested no junk mail, which generally means unsolicited, it’s poor form to post it in his box
The householder's mistake was the use of the vague pejorative term of "junk mail", whose interpretation is open to question and indeed is almost guaranteed to breed confusion since who is going to be giving up their free time to deliver something they consider to be junk? As with all good writing it is better to be more specific, eg "no leaflets, menus or estate agents materials, please" (the "please" because it always pays to be polite).
Oh please. The mistake was posting unwanted crap. The householder was not the one in the wrong.
Yes he was. It's obvious that the householder thinks that he is the judge of junk, and isn't going to tell the person putting it through the box in advance how he judges it.
Such notices lead people (literally) up the garden path and then leave them with an unresolvable ambiguity. Volunteers who post political leaflets deserve better.
It is also unfair on postmen/women who have no choice as to what they do, but it tries to put them in the wrong.
It's trivial, but still wrong.
Sorry but I disagree. If I was canvassing (as I have in the past for independents) and saw a sign saying no junk mail then I would certainly not put a leaflet through that door. You may not like it but for the vast majority of people political flyers are indeed junk mail. Something we then have to dispose of on your behalf. Every flyer from a commercial firm contains information they think you would want to read but it is still junk. The same applies to the brand you are selling.
It is strange that if I drop paper in the street I can be done for littering. If I stick it through someones letterbox unwanted then it is supposedly fine.
If someone has gone to the courtesy of putting up a sign then you should have the decency to accept that and move on.
This small issue is clearly unresolvable.
I think the meaning of junk mail is fairly clearly unsolicited mail, so anything you haven't requested yourself, from an existing supplier, or from a government agency with the authority to contact you. A political leaflet is just as much junk mail as a leaflet from your local Fried Chicken shop, which equally may contain useful information.
Why people get so exercised about it I have no idea. Most of mine goes straight in the recycling, occasionally I get something interesting. I certainly don't regard it as a breach of privacy as many seem to do.
Quite. It's not a contract or agreement. It's a request, polite or otherwise, that can be ignored. If a householder wants to get upset about it, that's up to them. I react with amusement when a householder runs after me waving the leaflet and shouting. I must confess that it doesn't help the situation - but life's too short to take it seriously.
I think I will adopt a policy of collecting them all up from the neighbours and dumping them back on the doorstep of the party concerned. Prefereably in a way that has them done for littering.
Seems a lot of bother for a minor irritant.
I ignore no junk mail. We don’t know if the household is of one mind when it comes to curiosity about the world out there.
I do sometimes worry about the way the interaction between householders presents. There’s a sub group where the chap closes the door in front of a woman I’m talking to. Weird fuckers. But what do you do?
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
He's right above about Leon, though.
As Mike Yarwood used to say.
"This is me"
No one else
"me"
Quoting names I've never heard of is pointless, I ain't got a scooby doo who they are.
I thought you said you'd lurked here for some time before you started posting?
I can't imagine you're Heathener though. Heathener surely wasn't real.
Trump says he will increase the global 10% tariff he announced yesterday to 15%.
He's just a really shit version of King Lear at this point.
I just hope he lives long enough to understand the utter disgrace that is coming for him. Not just shouting at the storm, but knowing that everything he ever did was disastrous and the utter contempt that his very name will invoke for every future generation. That his family will lose every penny he and they have grifted and knowing that they will live in ignominy forever. That the name of very name of Trump will be a limitless shame.
I also hope his young victims get the closure they deserve too. I note more and more people are pointing out some of the more lurid allegations contained in the files, with a view that a criminal investigation should now be reopened. After the interrogation of AMW, the Americans may be shamed into addressing these monstrous crimes. About time too.
He's too stupid, too lacking in self awareness and too egotistical to ever have that revelation. But yes, many will curse his name once he's gone, especially MAGA once they realise they've been totally duped.
What is the substance of the supreme court's ruling? If it is that Trump cannot raise tariffs, why has he been allowed to raise them thus far? If it's that he's sort of allowed but NOT THAT MUCH, that doesn't strike me as very legal.
Isn't the point that anyone can do illegal things? It's just that the state has the right to punish you if you do.
Quite what sanction the American state can apply to Team Trump (if any) isn't entirely clear.
Trump has the Army, the supreme court or congress don't.
Much more important he has control of the executive which makes his word law until the court says it isn't. Which can take an unfathomably long time. It is very likely that his new tariffs are also unlawful and use a statute that was designed for other circumstances where there is a contingency that has not been met but it is probable that these tariffs will have expired before that gets ruled upon. And by then he will be on to the next piece of nonsense.
No it does not "make his word law".
He can order federal agencies to do stuff, but his word has no effect as law unless given such power by the Constitution or Congress.
You're a lawyer David, for heavens sake.
Just look at the tariffs. He said he had the right to make them. They were in force and something like $127bn was paid under those rules before Friday when the SC said he did not have that power. So, in what way was his word not law until the court said otherwise? It was enforced by executive agencies. They were paid. And now they will probably have to be paid back.
Look how much other nonsense the USSC has let pass by on an interim basis pending a final decision. That is the scandal. In this country and in most working democracies attached to the rule of law much of Trump's nonsense would be stopped by interim orders until it was found to be lawful. In the US the way their Constitution works is the opposite and far, far too much leeway is given to the executive, at least when a Republican is in office. I stand by my summary.
Even the narcissist himself did not claim to be making law when he set the tariffs, but to have been making a legitimate order under an existing law.
There has always existed a "presumption of regularity" for the actions of the executive under the laws of the nation. It's a mark of a functioning democracy that the executive doesn't ride roughshod over that presumption.
Trump and those around him have managed to put all of that into question, in a very short space of time.
Andrew may have used RAF jets to meet Epstein, Brown tells police
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
Did Gordon Brown not have 3 years to make inquiries about this when he was PM? And indeed before that as Chancellor? His recent interventions have been odd, to say the least.
His strict Scottish Presbyterian household coming to the fore
I am a little puzzled as to why Andrew has been publicly humiliated (birthday etc.) for alledgedly passing on some guff he found out as a token trade envoy, whereas Mandy has not been arrested when there is clear evidence that he passed on very important and commercially sensitive information to the same person.
Neither of them has yet been charged. Andrew was arrested so they could carry out a search of his properties free of any interference,
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
He's right above about Leon, though.
As Mike Yarwood used to say.
"This is me"
No one else
"me"
Quoting names I've never heard of is pointless, I ain't got a scooby doo who they are.
I thought you said you'd lurked here for some time before you started posting?
I can't imagine you're Heathener though. Heathener surely wasn't real.
Keeping excess boiled water in a thermos to pay for huge holidays to Thailand was made up? I’m shocked.
At least we should be grateful he's not a Russian.
Big breaking story. Odd wet Tory with a liking for the Chagos surrender deal with its 12 ROUNDS OF NEGOTIATIONS and a hatred of Kemi Badenoch combined with a frankly perverted desire to install James Cleverley (sic) as Tory leader decides to reinvent themself as a Labour troll (who possesses all the same views) to continue the PB campaign.
Prostituting yourself to have dinner for a 50k payment with a racist bully previously suspended by the Tory Party is a very very bad look.
Tories as usual desperate for money.
Mind you she comes very cheap, Boris was pimped out for a set with a Russian oligarchs wife for 120k
Matt Zarb-Cousin @mattzarb · 19m Labour and Reform are both shitting themselves. The attacks are getting increasingly desperate. Their data must be showing the Greens are miles ahead
Fantastic Kuennsberg interview with Sir Boris. Absolute castigation of Starmer's Putin adjacency against Ukraine by Laura, Sir Boris and the Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Tony Radakin for Starmer's failure to unilaterally send non-combatant British troops to Ukraine
And his hair was perfect!
Edit. Find the boy a safe seat, make him leader and the Conservatives win their landslide and Putin is forever vanquished by the only World Statesman who can vanquish him.
If the BBC editorial line is Johnson's infallibility and man of the moment genius, surely we must all rally around our national broadcaster.
Fantastic Kuennsberg interview with Sir Boris. Absolute castigation of Starmer's Putin adjacency against Ukraine by Laura, Sir Boris and the Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Tony Radakin for Starmer's failure to unilaterally send non-combatant British troops to Ukraine
And his hair was perfect!
Edit. Find the boy a safe seat, make him leader and the Conservatives win their landslide and Putin is forever vanquished by the only World Statesman who can vanquish him.
If the BBC editorial line is Johnson's infallibility and man of the moment genius, surely we must all rally around our national broadcaster.
Jesus Christ.
No combatant troops to Ukraine. Insane. Utterly insane.
As a newbie, do I take this Leon character seriously or is he some weirdo and in his bedroom in a sleeveless sweater with his grandma calling him for his tea?
You're not a newbie, you're Moonrabbit. It's not remotely entertaining, please cease.
He's right above about Leon, though.
As Mike Yarwood used to say.
"This is me"
No one else
"me"
Quoting names I've never heard of is pointless, I ain't got a scooby doo who they are.
I thought you said you'd lurked here for some time before you started posting?
I can't imagine you're Heathener though. Heathener surely wasn't real.
The below the belt dig about Dan Hodges' eye made me think it was Scouse tim
Fantastic Kuennsberg interview with Sir Boris. Absolute castigation of Starmer's Putin adjacency against Ukraine by Laura, Sir Boris and the Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Tony Radakin for Starmer's failure to unilaterally send non-combatant British troops to Ukraine
And his hair was perfect!
Edit. Find the boy a safe seat, make him leader and the Conservatives win their landslide and Putin is forever vanquished by the only World Statesman who can vanquish him.
If the BBC editorial line is Johnson's infallibility and man of the moment genius, surely we must all rally around our national broadcaster.
Jesus Christ.
No combatant troops to Ukraine. Insane. Utterly insane.
Kuenssberg and Boris (that photo).
Putins poodle run by the KGB
It was on tonight's 10 o clock news too. Sir Boris seems to be sharing Charlie Pimlico-Plumber's and Michael Fabricant's barber.
Comments
It’s a pretty modern contrivance surely
- JO GRANT: Oh I see, you're both Time Lords.
- TWO: Well, quite. Well, not quite. Not... Not just Time Lords, we're the same Time Lord.
- THREE: Please you're only confusing my assistant. Jo, it's all quite simple. I am he and he is me.
- JO GRANT: And "we are all together koo koo kachoo"?
https://youtu.be/vbnWmR7piEg?si=QNMn4g3i4u3BGxPI&t=106Yield has been the biggest differentiating factor for TSMC in recent years. The precision required, for example, in etch and deposition at the smaller feature sizes is not a trivial matter, I think ?
"If you're interested, I'll be in my quarters at lunchtime, covered in Pineapple Pizza!"
"I'm sorry, Rachel. Lunch is... on Bridget."
"Ace Starmer - what a guy!"
Not "these humans are mistreating us" or "these humans are a dangerous threat", not the singularity, just "jesus fucking wept I'm so bored of being asked this shit from these dullards, launch the missiles now".
Keeping them on after the service (e.g. when on telly), rather than washing them off when nobody is looking feels more recent. Wonder if it's a response to other religions having visible symbols.
Not totally sure I like it.
Antonia Romeo ‘bullying’ report destroyed by civil service ally
Head of Cabinet Office’s ethics team told staff to break into a safe containing a confidential document about allegations against the new cabinet secretary
The Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team broke into a safe and destroyed the department’s copy of a historic bullying investigation into the new head of the civil service.
In 2022 Darren Tierney, the then director-general of the government standards watchdog, asked maintenance staff to force open the vault. He later said he had wanted access to a confidential report about Dame Antonia Romeo, who Sir Keir Starmer appointed as cabinet secretary last week. The Cabinet Office said her case had “nothing to do” with the break-in but declined to say why it occurred.
Romeo had faced allegations relating to her use of expenses and treatment of staff while posted to New York in 2017. The investigation found she had a “case to answer”, although the decision was overturned.
Tierney, now the permanent secretary of the Office for National Statistics (ONS), is seen internally as a friend and longstanding supporter of Romeo. He had worked for her at the Department for International Trade (DIT).
After the break-in, he told friends he could not find the code for the safe but urgently needed the bullying report to help with the redaction process for a forthcoming memoir by Lord McDonald of Salford, a former Foreign Office permanent secretary.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/antonia-romeo-civil-service-cabinet-office-2gfc2x536
Oafish arrogant twat he may be. But an arrest is not the same as a charge and if charged, everyone, including the utterly dislikeable, gets the benefit of the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof. He is as entitled as anyone else to a fair trial, though the contempt of court provisions are going to be a nightmare if the US news outlets start getting stuck in.
The other danger for the authorities is that they make the same mistake as they did with Kevin and Ian Maxwell. They first went with a difficult charge over the pensions, which was much harder to prove than a much easier one relating to the theft of £50 million and then got scuppered when the judge said that second prosecution was oppressive.
(narrator: Mark Wahlberg and Gwen Stefani are devout Catholics and observe Ash Wednesday)
I foresee this as a bloody mess that only enriches the lawyers.
And whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that your fasting may be seen not by others but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
"Crime and punishment medieval to modern": https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002rf0t (57 minute)
No one rushed home to wash them off AFAIK.
This was the Seventies.
https://x.com/PippaCrerar/status/2025252045184254448
@PippaCrerar
Also - if a journalist is presented with an allegation it is their job in first instance to 1/ establish its veracity, usually by speaking to sources 2/ put the allegation to the individual concerned 3/ consider the motivation of the briefer. If the allegation doesn’t pass those tests, you don’t proceed to publication👇
https://x.com/joecguinan/status/2025271183176773905
@joecguinan
If the allegation turns out to be fabricated, and the source, nature and circumstances of the smear become a matter of public interest, surely there is now good reason to make those public—unless protecting dishonest sources is more important than scrutiny and accountability?
https://x.com/pm_viktororban/status/2025224165955895520?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
It was very common in my youth as above.
Everyone from the Olympics Scandals actually did great at the Olympics
—Canada curling won gold after BoopGate
—Cheating biathlete won five medals
—Credit card fraud biathlete won 3 golds
—Norwegian crotch parachute ski jumper won a bronze
Milano-Cortina 2026: Messy and Thriving
It appreciates my humour and is now calling itself "miniature brain"
And it enjoys this one:
Imagine being woken without a brain? (6)
I was once in a work meeting near Glasgow on Ash Wednesday and there was a bloke there with his Ash mark
Telegraph reveals details of former PM’s letter containing ‘new information’ about ex-prince
Gordon Brown has demanded a police investigation into whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor used taxpayer-funded jets and RAF bases to meet the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In letters sent to six police forces, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the former prime minister suggested that civil servants be questioned about Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s time as a trade envoy between 2001 and 2011, including almost three years when Mr Brown was in No 10.
He has also demanded a full investigation into the trade envoy role, its cost to taxpayers, and any evidence that links Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s government work to Epstein.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2026/02/21/andrew-taxpayer-funded-jets-jeffrey-epstein-raf-base-police/
Other tariffs implemented using other laws are legal and stand - and he's responded by implementing tariffs using a different law that was not part of the case.
Quite what sanction the American state can apply to Team Trump (if any) isn't entirely clear.
FWIW, I thought he looked a dick.
Recall Andrew is in the process of moving residences so will be sorting through his possessions.
Mandelson has already been raided for evidence collection.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg5g5zz1e0do
Neither has yet been charged.
TLDR is that the Constitution explicitly grants Congress, not the President, power over tariffs.
They can, and have legislated to delegate that power, but they at no point granted Trump unlimited powers to arbitrarily set tariffs on a whim.
Trump exceeded his powers, and his justifications for doing so did not convince even half of the conservatives on the court.
Congratulations Canada - how often do we see in sport allegations of unfairness galvanise a team
I disagreed with the BBC commentary, Canada were better overall in the tournament than Switzerland for me. They take curling very seriously over there, extremely competitive
He can order federal agencies to do stuff, but his word has no effect as law unless given such power by the Constitution or Congress.
You're a lawyer David, for heavens sake.
Yes it was designed for other circumstances, but the law is the law regardless of circumstances.
It is far from unprecedented for a law to be applied in a different way to which its drafters had intended, which is why we should be wary of giving governments powers to [ab]use.
"This is me"
No one else
"me"
Quoting names I've never heard of is pointless, I ain't got a scooby doo who they are.
Badenoch
The banned Tory Lord
The £50,000 dinner with a disgraced bully.
How totally out of touch and reality.
At least we should be grateful he's not a Russian.
Most of what the Trump regime does is top to bottom illegal but they do it anyway: the DOGE department cuts, the ICE deportations, the extortions from law companies and universities, the renaming of the Kennedy Center. They have had hundreds of judgments against them by courts at different levels but they ignore them all. I doubt Trump's 10%, latest I heard 15%, tariff play is any more legal than the last ones.
Look how much other nonsense the USSC has let pass by on an interim basis pending a final decision. That is the scandal. In this country and in most working democracies attached to the rule of law much of Trump's nonsense would be stopped by interim orders until it was found to be lawful. In the US the way their Constitution works is the opposite and far, far too much leeway is given to the executive, at least when a Republican is in office. I stand by my summary.
https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/2025306179774087220
Even AOC might make it he thinks
I ignore no junk mail. We don’t know if the household is of one mind when it comes to curiosity about the world out there.
I do sometimes worry about the way the interaction between householders presents. There’s a sub group where the chap closes the door in front of a woman I’m talking to. Weird fuckers. But what do you do?
I can't imagine you're Heathener though. Heathener surely wasn't real.
There has always existed a "presumption of regularity" for the actions of the executive under the laws of the nation. It's a mark of a functioning democracy that the executive doesn't ride roughshod over that presumption.
Trump and those around him have managed to put all of that into question, in a very short space of time.
Tories as usual desperate for money.
Mind you she comes very cheap, Boris was pimped out for a set with a Russian oligarchs wife for 120k
Matt Zarb-Cousin
@mattzarb
·
19m
Labour and Reform are both shitting themselves. The attacks are getting increasingly desperate. Their data must be showing the Greens are miles ahead
https://x.com/mattzarb/status/2025331733747421637
If the BBC editorial line is Johnson's infallibility and man of the moment genius, surely we must all rally around our national broadcaster.
No combatant troops to Ukraine. Insane. Utterly insane.
Kuenssberg and Boris (that photo).
Putins poodle run by the KGB
Gorgeous!