Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.
Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
"A safe assumption has now turned into something close to certainty that Mrs May will stay in No 10, with an increased majority, and we can also be reasonably sure Jeremy Corbyn will not be leader for long. Weirdly, this helps him get more votes."
Oh really.....
The sympathy shag vote, to stop Mrs May giving a silly majority/save Labour
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.
(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
Does 'fascism' now mean 'wanting immigration controls'?
It means anything that the 'liberal elite' don't like - and as such has no meaning at all and so can be safely ignored along with racist, xenophobe, islamophobe, corbynophobe, little-englander, neocon, lepenophile etc.
Pretty well all European countries have immigration controls. Some work better than others.
Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.
Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
"A safe assumption has now turned into something close to certainty that Mrs May will stay in No 10, with an increased majority, and we can also be reasonably sure Jeremy Corbyn will not be leader for long. Weirdly, this helps him get more votes."
Oh really.....
The sympathy shag vote, to stop Mrs May giving a silly majority/save Labour
My point was about Jezza going....he appears to be making quite clear he intends to nothing of the sort. I wonder what all Polly Nose Pegs Labour voters will think?
I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.
(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
I've heard they even let people with red shoes into Fen Poly.
Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.
Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
"A safe assumption has now turned into something close to certainty that Mrs May will stay in No 10, with an increased majority, and we can also be reasonably sure Jeremy Corbyn will not be leader for long. Weirdly, this helps him get more votes."
Oh really.....
The sympathy shag vote, to stop Mrs May giving a silly majority/save Labour
My point was about Jezza going....he appears to be making quite clear he intends to nothing of the sort. I wonder what all Polly Nose Pegs Labour voters will think?
If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!
Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.
Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
A lot of my Leftie mates seem to be leaning that way, which I think unwise as a vote for Labour will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid. . (At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
I've heard they even let people with red shoes into Fen Poly.
Wouldn't happen at good old Cowley Tech.
Cowley Tech let in David Miliband with 3 Bs and a D, and also Jeffrey Archer.
I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?
Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?
Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?
Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.
This should explain it better than I can
Here's one of the tests.
The evidential test
The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction.
This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.
It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction
Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.
Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
A lot of my Leftie mates seem to be leaning that way, which I think unwise as a vote for Labour will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?
I have come to the conclusion that a vote for Labour is a vote for Corbyn's cronies (Milne and McDonnell), and one vote closer to them staying propping the old fool up...
But as your definition of bullying means asking people to make election predictions rather than trolling; and smearing, quoting polls; you might have a problem with crying wolf.
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.
(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
"Extensive trade links from mid 50s BC onwards" doesn't justify "so probably before that as well", because of rather important events in 55 and 54 BC. And, again, trade links don't imply travels from one end of the chain to the other. She presumably simply misdates Caesar's invasion by a few centuries, since she says "centurions" rather than "traders" (and also thinks centurion just means soldier, in the absence of any argument why centurions are more likely to be black than other ranks are).
I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.
Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
A lot of my Leftie mates seem to be leaning that way, which I think unwise as a vote for Labour will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?
I have come to the conclusion that a vote for Labour is a vote for Corbyn's cronies (Milne and McDonnell), and one vote closer to them staying propping the old fool up...
That's the problem. But the collective Leftie view seems to be that they don't want to destroy the party/give May a blank cheque.
i really want to know, from one of our recent resident experts on fascism (you know who you are, Meeks et al.), how does one qualify as a fascist beyond wanting controls on immigration? That seems to be your absurd bar for it..
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid. . (At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
I've heard they even let people with red shoes into Fen Poly.
Wouldn't happen at good old Cowley Tech.
Cowley Tech let in David Miliband with 3 Bs and a D, and also Jeffrey Archer.
Just saying.
No, no, no. You have made the schoolboy error of believing what Jeffrey archer says. He attended a teacher training course or something which took place during the long vacation at Brasenose; he was never a member of the university.
I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
Can we rewind... Leeds East - key target?!
Amusing 2010 Lib Dem vote that collapsed there and reappeared as UKIP in 2015 ! Tories might get 35% there but looks to far to me.
I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
Can we rewind... Leeds East - key target?!
According to The Telegraph and Mrs May.
She has stopped off there on her campaign tour. Of all the places she's stopped at, I think it's the one with the biggest swing required to take it.
Interesting. I did write about this a few weeks ago.
Top pollster Stephan Shakespeare will be analysing the state of the parties exclusively for the Standard during the General Election campaign. Today the CEO and founder of YouGov says the latest evidence indicates many traditional Labour voters are preparing to ‘hold their nose’ and back the party again despite doubts over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
A lot of my Leftie mates seem to be leaning that way, which I think unwise as a vote for Labour will be interpreted as a vote for Corbyn. What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?
I have come to the conclusion that a vote for Labour is a vote for Corbyn's cronies (Milne and McDonnell), and one vote closer to them staying propping the old fool up...
Given your fondness of my favoured Conservative leader, I suspect you're a nats whisker away from voting Tory....
I have to say that unless Labour are thrashed the hard ridiculous left will hang on. I find that outrageous. It would also be a travesty if Corbyn in any way, shape, manner or form beat Michael Foot, who was on comparison reasonable, very intelligent, a magnificent orator and indeed a man of integrity, Corbyn is none of those and he deserves to lose and lose very very badly.
But as your definition of bullying means asking people to make election predictions rather than trolling; and smearing, quoting polls; you might have a problem with crying wolf.
Repeatedly demanding a particular person appears so you can have a go at them is bullying.
Misleadingly partially quoting polls to make a group you disagree with look bad is smearing.
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
"Extensive trade links from mid 50s BC onwards" doesn't justify "so probably before that as well", because of rather important events in 55 and 54 BC. And, again, trade links don't imply travels from one end of the chain to the other. She presumably simply misdates Caesar's invasion by a few centuries, since she says "centurions" rather than "traders" (and also thinks centurion just means soldier, in the absence of any argument why centurions are more likely to be black than other ranks are).
From WP:
There is evidence of the presence of people from Romanised North Africa in Roman Britain. Archaeological inscriptions suggest that most of these residents were involved with the military. However, some were in the upper echelons of society. Analysis of a skull found in a Roman grave in Yorkshire indicated that it belonged to a mixed-race female. Her sarcophagus was made of stone and also contained a jet bracelet and an ivory bangle, indicating great wealth for the time.
In 2007, scientists found the rare paternal haplogroup A1 in several living British men with Yorkshire surnames. This clade is today almost exclusively found among males in West Africa, where it is also rare. The haplogroup is thus thought to have been brought to Britain either through enlisted soldiers during Roman Britain, or via the slave trade. Some of the individuals who arrived through the slave route attained a very high social rank and married into the general population.
What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?
If it is entirely within the box, a good agent will argue that it is expression of a clear preference and that the vote should stand.
I've argued that a quickly drawn phallus is a valid vote...
Surely there is the basis of a voting campaign right there? Love Labour, Hate Corbyn? Join our campaign to write Corbyn Is A Massive Twat in the Labour box.
I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
Can we rewind... Leeds East - key target?!
According to The Telegraph and Mrs May.
She has stopped off there on her campaign tour. Of all the places she's stopped at, I think it's the one with the biggest swing required to take it.
If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!
That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.
I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?
Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.
This should explain it better than I can
Here's one of the tests.
The evidential test
The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction.
This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.
It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction
So if they do bring charges, there must be substantial evidence that there was intent to commit fraud. If so, that is extremely serious, especially if it applies to all the MPs involved. The media will be salivating over this.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?
Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.
This should explain it better than I can
Here's one of the tests.
The evidential test
The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction.
This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.
It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction
That is clear and understandable, could be because there are no puns or 80s pop music references.
I wonder if those criteria are more helpful to the accused than to CPS or other parties?
It has always looked to me that the real guilt lies at Central Office, not local level. I could see a case built around the advice from central office that the EC had always accepted the battle bus costs as National expenditure in the past, so it was not to be included in local costs as overwhelmingly persuasive. I suspect the EC is guilty of allowing unacceptable practice to grow over time, and for that to become the moving line with each election to which the parties could acceptably bend the rules.
Whilst guilt of someone(or more than one) in the Tory ranks is undeniable, I could see agents and MPs building a good defense.
That, of course, is academic in terms of the bad press from charges, accusations and a hostile and aggressive press.
I hate Theresa May. She's trying to topple Richard Burgon, we need him in Parliament, he should be Corbyn's replacement.
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
Can we rewind... Leeds East - key target?!
According to The Telegraph and Mrs May.
She has stopped off there on her campaign tour. Of all the places she's stopped at, I think it's the one with the biggest swing required to take it.
He's priceless and has a great career outside politics to look forward to as the new lembit opik
If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!
That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.
I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.
The electoral system is not that different. It is closer to our system than it is to PR. Of all the forms of alternative electoral systems, the French is the model after FPTP I'd accept the most.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.
(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
"Extensive trade links from mid 50s BC onwards" doesn't justify "so probably before that as well", because of rather important events in 55 and 54 BC. And, again, trade links don't imply travels from one end of the chain to the other. She presumably simply misdates Caesar's invasion by a few centuries, since she says "centurions" rather than "traders" (and also thinks centurion just means soldier, in the absence of any argument why centurions are more likely to be black than other ranks are).
There is evidence of pre birth of Christ trading with Phoenician traders, and whilst the Roman world would have rubbed up against our shores I don't believe there is any evidence of Romans being here say pre 200 BC which is what we are talking about as Rome's empire hadn't got going by then.
What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?
If it is entirely within the box, a good agent will argue that it is expression of a clear preference and that the vote should stand.
I've argued that a quickly drawn phallus is a valid vote...
I doubt a written comment obviously negative about a candidate would qualify as a valid vote (leaving aside any considerations about identifying the voter). I believe there is case precedent about "not him" written in the box not counting.
At least with a drawing there is a degree of ambiguity.
But as your definition of bullying means asking people to make election predictions rather than trolling; and smearing, quoting polls; you might have a problem with crying wolf.
Repeatedly demanding a particular person appears so you can have a go at them is bullying.
Misleadingly partially quoting polls to make a group you disagree with look bad is smearing.
Hope this helps.
I asked Moniker several times to predict the French election result after he - several times - ramped and dog whistled a Le Pen victory. That is a perfectly reasonable response. It is not bullying.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
The CPS know that the Tories will win the election -are they really going to make a decision before June the 8th ?
Legally they have no choice; they have already been granted one extension and the deadlines are days away. I have no idea whether a minister could grant a further extension or not, but the political costs of doing so probably rule this out even if it could be done.
If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!
That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.
I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.
Thanks. I now think that a split may not be that bad an outcome. Given that the splitting party will (I assume) have 100+ MPs and five years, that's not too bad a starting point.
But as your definition of bullying means asking people to make election predictions rather than trolling; and smearing, quoting polls; you might have a problem with crying wolf.
Repeatedly demanding a particular person appears so you can have a go at them is bullying.
Misleadingly partially quoting polls to make a group you disagree with look bad is smearing.
Hope this helps.
I asked Moniker several times to predict the French election result after he - several times - ramped and dog whistled a Le Pen victory. That is a perfectly reasonable response. It is not bullying.
Will you define fascist for us? I think you've been throwing it around a bit lately, and accusing fellow PBers of being fascist supporters, if memory serves (apols if I'm wrong). Surely you can quite easily tell us precisely what you mean by it?
If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!
That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.
I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.
The electoral system is not that different. It is closer to our system than it is to PR. Of all the forms of alternative electoral systems, the French is the model after FPTP I'd accept the most.
Without the AV-style forced run off it was close to a four-way tie between him, a loony lefty, a proto-fascist, and an apparently corrupt Conservative. Which is only encouraging up to a point...
But as your definition of bullying means asking people to make election predictions rather than trolling; and smearing, quoting polls; you might have a problem with crying wolf.
Repeatedly demanding a particular person appears so you can have a go at them is bullying.
Misleadingly partially quoting polls to make a group you disagree with look bad is smearing.
Hope this helps.
I asked Moniker several times to predict the French election result after he - several times - ramped and dog whistled a Le Pen victory. That is a perfectly reasonable response. It is not bullying.
Will you define fascist for us? I think you've been throwing it around a bit lately, and accusing fellow PBers of being fascist supporters, if memory serves (apols if I'm wrong). Surely you can quite easily tell us precisely what you mean by it?
It often appears to mean 'disagrees with me'
Must be a modern definition in the Urban dictionary.
People who struggle with an alternative viewpoint are intolerant. A bit fascist, really.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?
Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.
This should explain it better than I can
Here's one of the tests.
The evidential test
The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction.
This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.
It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction
That is clear and understandable, could be because there are no puns or 80s pop music references.
I wonder if those criteria are more helpful to the accused than to CPS or other parties?
It has always looked to me that the real guilt lies at Central Office, not local level. I could see a case built around the advice from central office that the EC had always accepted the battle bus costs as National expenditure in the past, so it was not to be included in local costs as overwhelmingly persuasive. I suspect the EC is guilty of allowing unacceptable practice to grow over time, and for that to become the moving line with each election to which the parties could acceptably bend the rules.
Whilst guilt of someone(or more than one) in the Tory ranks is undeniable, I could see agents and MPs building a good defense.
That, of course, is academic in terms of the bad press from charges, accusations and a hostile and aggressive press.
"It has always looked to me that the real guilt lies at Central Office, not local level"
Which is why in certain cases the ramifications could be very serious.
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid. . (At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
I've heard they even let people with red shoes into Fen Poly.
Wouldn't happen at good old Cowley Tech.
Cowley Tech let in David Miliband with 3 Bs and a D, and also Jeffrey Archer.
Just saying.
Now CEO of International Rescue (Archer never went to Oxford). So if he was as dense as Abbott going in, we must have added more value while he was there...
What happens if I write Corbyn is a Massive Twat in the Labour box?
If it is entirely within the box, a good agent will argue that it is expression of a clear preference and that the vote should stand.
I've argued that a quickly drawn phallus is a valid vote...
I doubt a written comment obviously negative about a candidate would qualify as a valid vote (leaving aside any considerations about identifying the voter). I believe there is case precedent about "not him" written in the box not counting.
At least with a drawing there is a degree of ambiguity.
But in this case I'd argue that it was not referencing the candidate but a third party, and thus all we can know is they have made marks entirely within my candidate's box and it should stand as a valid vote. If the opposition agent is asleep and the RO reasonable, then it could count.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
As a non legal expert, is the CPS expected to bring charges in cases that it thinks they will win, or where they think the potential defendant is guilty?
Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.
This should explain it better than I can
Here's one of the tests.
The evidential test
The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction.
This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.
It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction
That is clear and understandable, could be because there are no puns or 80s pop music references.
I wonder if those criteria are more helpful to the accused than to CPS or other parties?
It has always looked to me that the real guilt lies at Central Office, not local level. I could see a case built around the advice from central office that the EC had always accepted the battle bus costs as National expenditure in the past, so it was not to be included in local costs as overwhelmingly persuasive. I suspect the EC is guilty of allowing unacceptable practice to grow over time, and for that to become the moving line with each election to which the parties could acceptably bend the rules.
Whilst guilt of someone(or more than one) in the Tory ranks is undeniable, I could see agents and MPs building a good defense.
That, of course, is academic in terms of the bad press from charges, accusations and a hostile and aggressive press.
"It has always looked to me that the real guilt lies at Central Office, not local level"
Which is why in certain cases the ramifications could be very serious.
I agree in principle, but not by prosecuting the local Agent /MP - if the guilt lies at Central Office.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
The CPS know that the Tories will win the election -are they really going to make a decision before June the 8th ?
Legally they have no choice; they have already been granted one extension and the deadlines are days away. I have no idea whether a minister could grant a further extension or not, but the political costs of doing so probably rule this out even if it could be done.
People keep talking about deadlines but -where have these dates come from?
But I wont put any money down on this election until i know what the DPS timescale is.
What qualifies her? Is it racism? And is wanting controls on immigration racist enough to be fascist? Or how how racist do you have to be to qualify? Or is it something else in Le Pen that makes her a fascist? You obviously don't need a dictator for fascism anymore, so I'm wondering precisely how one qualifies. And none of the fascism experts seem to have an answer.
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid. . (At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
I've heard they even let people with red shoes into Fen Poly.
Wouldn't happen at good old Cowley Tech.
Cowley Tech let in David Miliband with 3 Bs and a D, and also Jeffrey Archer.
Just saying.
Now CEO of International Rescue (Archer never went to Oxford). So if he was as dense as Abbott going in, we must have added more value while he was there...
Doesn't it mostly educate people to write, speak, broadcast and make political decisions about all the inventions and discoveries made by people from Cambridge?
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid. . (At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
I've heard they even let people with red shoes into Fen Poly.
Wouldn't happen at good old Cowley Tech.
Cowley Tech let in David Miliband with 3 Bs and a D, and also Jeffrey Archer.
Just saying.
No, no, no. You have made the schoolboy error of believing what Jeffrey archer says. He attended a teacher training course or something which took place during the long vacation at Brasenose; he was never a member of the university.
He was definitely a member of the JCR, we had the photos and minutes etc
Does 'fascism' now mean 'wanting immigration controls'?
It means anything that the 'liberal elite' don't like - and as such has no meaning at all and so can be safely ignored along with racist, xenophobe, islamophobe, corbynophobe, little-englander, neocon, lepenophile etc.
Doesn't it mostly educate people to write, speak, broadcast and make political decisions about all the inventions and discoveries made by people from Cambridge?
Yes, it educates us to employ Cambridge graduates in technical support roles.
Doesn't it mostly educate people to write, speak, broadcast and make political decisions about all the inventions and discoveries made by people from Cambridge?
Yes, it educates us to employ Cambridge graduates in technical support roles.
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.
(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
"Extensive trade links from mid 50s BC onwards" doesn't justify "so probably before that as well", because of rather important events in 55 and 54 BC. And, again, trade links don't imply travels from one end of the chain to the other. She presumably simply misdates Caesar's invasion by a few centuries, since she says "centurions" rather than "traders" (and also thinks centurion just means soldier, in the absence of any argument why centurions are more likely to be black than other ranks are).
It's not my period but I tend to take the view that trade links were more extensive than previously known. There have been interesting artefacts uncovered in Cornwall that came from Phoenica, for example. It's not proof of movement, but with ships it's possible.
I suspect that Abbott was simply wrong - as you say. But she could have been right by luck..,
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
The CPS know that the Tories will win the election -are they really going to make a decision before June the 8th ?
Legally they have no choice; they have already been granted one extension and the deadlines are days away. I have no idea whether a minister could grant a further extension or not, but the political costs of doing so probably rule this out even if it could be done.
People keep talking about deadlines but -where have these dates come from?
But I wont put any money down on this election until i know what the DPS timescale is.
The normal one year period to charge someone, which applied to all crimes AIUI, has been extended to two years. The date of the offence is the date the expenses returns were submitted for each constituency, and the time is almost up.
Edit/ to correct myself, the reference to all crimes is obvious nonsense, since serious crimes can be charged years after the event. Sorry. Nevertheless I know a one year limit applies in this particular case.
Newsnight asking if Macron can succeed in making the French more like the British. A noble aspiration.
Macron is economically closer to Osborne than he is Corbyn so quite possibly, I think France will grow quite strongly economically over the next few years, maybe even more than the UK and US but socially it will still have problems of integrating immigrants and terrorist attacks
If I credited Corbyn with any guile I would say that his ludicrous statement that he will go on and on was designed to spark a mid campaign rebellion from the PLP so the absurd Milne can then blame the inevitable election smashing on them. But that would be too clever by half. As it is, Corbyn will be challenged and if he wins the challenge the party will split. So be it. Five years is long enough to build a party. Just look at Macron!
That is a very fair point-if you were a Labour MP who was not a Corbynista, Macron's victory would be very encouraging.
I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.
Thanks. I now think that a split may not be that bad an outcome. Given that the splitting party will (I assume) have 100+ MPs and five years, that's not too bad a starting point.
With the likely support of the MSM and lots of bright young things on FB-it will take at least 2 electoral turns but it probably will do in any case.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
The CPS know that the Tories will win the election -are they really going to make a decision before June the 8th ?
Legally they have no choice; they have already been granted one extension and the deadlines are days away. I have no idea whether a minister could grant a further extension or not, but the political costs of doing so probably rule this out even if it could be done.
People keep talking about deadlines but -where have these dates come from?
But I wont put any money down on this election until i know what the DPS timescale is.
The normal one year period to charge someone, which applied to all crimes AIUI, has been extended to two years. The date of the offence is the date the expenses returns were submitted for each constituency, and the time is almost up.
Some will have submitted very soon, others would have waited until the last moment (June 7th).
This from a graduate of Cambridge "University", ffs.
In fairness there is evidence of extensive trade links, certainly from the mid 50s BC onwards so plausible before then. In this context it's likely that there were blacks (or at least African born) Romans in Britain in the time frame she suggests
Probably not Centurions though!
It's not my period, but I believe retired NCOs like Centurions retained their rank. But that does make it less likely, yes, although not laughably stupid.
(At least it wouldn't be laughably stupid if it had been someone other than Abbott making the comment. She's just a blithering idiot)
It is laughably stupid because she seems to believe there were Romans in Britain 'hundreds of years before Christ'. Whatever your view on there being blacks amongst the Romans who landed here - and I think it very likely to the point of certainty, she has managed to push back the arrival of the Romans by several centuries.
She is basically dumber than a bag of rocks.
I think it is very probable there were Romans in Britain hundreds of years before Christ.
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
"Extensive trade links from mid 50s BC onwards" doesn't justify "so probably before that as well", because of rather important events in 55 and 54 BC. And, again, trade links don't imply travels from one end of the chain to the other. She presumably simply misdates Caesar's invasion by a few centuries, since she says "centurions" rather than "traders" (and also thinks centurion just means soldier, in the absence of any argument why centurions are more likely to be black than other ranks are).
It's not my period but I tend to take the view that trade links were more extensive than previously known. There have been interesting artefacts uncovered in Cornwall that came from Phoenica, for example. It's not proof of movement, but with ships it's possible.
I suspect that Abbott was simply wrong - as you say. But she could have been right by luck..,
Not mine either - but when I started studying Medieval history the most important lesson was that sea travel was much quicker than 'road' travel.
Thinking back to the CPS, it will be far more damaging if the charges come out in dribs and drabs, rather than in one go.
The CPS know that the Tories will win the election -are they really going to make a decision before June the 8th ?
Legally they have no choice; they have already been granted one extension and the deadlines are days away. I have no idea whether a minister could grant a further extension or not, but the political costs of doing so probably rule this out even if it could be done.
People keep talking about deadlines but -where have these dates come from?
But I wont put any money down on this election until i know what the DPS timescale is.
The normal one year period to charge someone, which applied to all crimes AIUI, has been extended to two years. The date of the offence is the date the expenses returns were submitted for each constituency, and the time is almost up.
Some will have submitted very soon, others would have waited until the last moment (June 7th).
I believe the dates in the 15 seats are mostly late May. It's unusual to wait to the last minute, partly because it is a job most candidates and agents are eager to get out of the way, and also because most EROs are friendly enough to cast an eye over submissions and give someone a ring if they have made an obvious cockup like forgetting to sign them or putting the wrong year as the date.
It has a lot of potential. One of the most productive countries in Europe I understand, per hour worked. Much more productive than the meeting-obsessed UK.
Comments
See, points 2,3, and 4 here
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/04/23/why-a-1997-style-landslide-or-even-a-1983-style-landslide-might-not-happen-but-maybe-a-2005-style-majority-of-66-will/
Each extra criterion (centurions, black) reduces the probability somewhat.
But I agree with your conclusion! What I don't understand is how did she get into Fenland Poly?
Pretty well all European countries have immigration controls. Some work better than others.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11013786/France-becoming-weak-link-in-European-migration-control-as-police-warn-of-alarming-rise-in-illegal-migrants.html
https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/861691466191585280
Mr Burgon, who nominated Mr Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, has failed to reference Mr Corbyn once in his four page campaign leaflet.
He has instead included a photograph of himself stood alongside the shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey and adopted the slogan ‘Putting East Leeds First’.
His constituency of Leeds East, where he has a 12,533 majority, is one of Theresa May's key target seats in June's election.
Wouldn't happen at good old Cowley Tech.
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/05/08/the-state-of-labour-post-anger-pre-recrimination/#more-21574
Just saying.
The Greens standing aside helps Lib Dems vs Tories.
I'm not convinced the Lib Dems standing aside in Brighton will necessarily help Lucas...
Guilt can be exceedingly difficult to prove and the two are very different.
Here's one of the tests.
The evidential test
The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction.
This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.
It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction
https://www.cps.gov.uk/victims_witnesses/reporting_a_crime/decision_to_charge.html
Near perfect: adjective
Of a Chancellor's macro-economic policy: Conducive to low unemployment and growth whilst rapidly improving the fiscal position; un-Brownian.
Indeed.
But as your definition of bullying means asking people to make election predictions rather than trolling; and smearing, quoting polls; you might have a problem with crying wolf.
Of politicians: the ability to hold down half a dozen jobs simultaneously.
I've argued that a quickly drawn phallus is a valid vote...
Tories might get 35% there but looks to far to me.
I have to say that unless Labour are thrashed the hard ridiculous left will hang on. I find that outrageous. It would also be a travesty if Corbyn in any way, shape, manner or form beat Michael Foot, who was on comparison reasonable, very intelligent, a magnificent orator and indeed a man of integrity, Corbyn is none of those and he deserves to lose and lose very very badly.
Misleadingly partially quoting polls to make a group you disagree with look bad is smearing.
Hope this helps.
There is evidence of the presence of people from Romanised North Africa in Roman Britain. Archaeological inscriptions suggest that most of these residents were involved with the military. However, some were in the upper echelons of society. Analysis of a skull found in a Roman grave in Yorkshire indicated that it belonged to a mixed-race female. Her sarcophagus was made of stone and also contained a jet bracelet and an ivory bangle, indicating great wealth for the time.
In 2007, scientists found the rare paternal haplogroup A1 in several living British men with Yorkshire surnames. This clade is today almost exclusively found among males in West Africa, where it is also rare. The haplogroup is thus thought to have been brought to Britain either through enlisted soldiers during Roman Britain, or via the slave trade. Some of the individuals who arrived through the slave route attained a very high social rank and married into the general population.
I know the electoral system is different but it is still encouraging.
That is clear and understandable, could be because there are no puns or 80s pop music references.
I wonder if those criteria are more helpful to the accused than to CPS or other parties?
It has always looked to me that the real guilt lies at Central Office, not local level. I could see a case built around the advice from central office that the EC had always accepted the battle bus costs as National expenditure in the past, so it was not to be included in local costs as overwhelmingly persuasive. I suspect the EC is guilty of allowing unacceptable practice to grow over time, and for that to become the moving line with each election to which the parties could acceptably bend the rules.
Whilst guilt of someone(or more than one) in the Tory ranks is undeniable, I could see agents and MPs building a good defense.
That, of course, is academic in terms of the bad press from charges, accusations and a hostile and aggressive press.
At least with a drawing there is a degree of ambiguity.
https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/861698888532668417
They could wimp out and make no decision, and then rather limply say - 'Nothing we can do, it is too late'
In some seats, he outperformed 1997 Tony Blair, including winning Altrincham & Sale West. (Hat-tip Stephen Bush)
If only....
Must be a modern definition in the Urban dictionary.
People who struggle with an alternative viewpoint are intolerant. A bit fascist, really.
I said Le Pen was a fascist.
Which is why in certain cases the ramifications could be very serious.
Hmm...
But I wont put any money down on this election until i know what the DPS timescale is.
https://youtu.be/HeKDcazGa1A
I suspect that Abbott was simply wrong - as you say. But she could have been right by luck..,
Edit/ to correct myself, the reference to all crimes is obvious nonsense, since serious crimes can be charged years after the event. Sorry. Nevertheless I know a one year limit applies in this particular case.
It has a lot of potential. One of the most productive countries in Europe I understand, per hour worked. Much more productive than the meeting-obsessed UK.