I can't say I have much sympathy with Vance. For some time now he's been dining out on being the archetypal MAGA loudmouth who slags off every other country that isn't the US. Now we're all supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt when he employs clumsy, ambiguous phrasing. Too bad. If he didn't want to be thought a twit he shouldn't have gone out of his way to act like one.
It could be 4D chess. Anti-Americanism in Europe is a stronger force than pro-Putinism and might be enough to get the likes of Mélenchon and Wagenknecht to switch sides.
I think we've learnt by now that it's not 4D chess.
Is there such a thing as 1D chess?
It'd be pretty limited. A lot of castling maybe.
Philosophical question: in 0D chess, is every piece a pawn or is every piece a queen?
First we have to decide if there are zero squares or one. One, I suppose. But then you can't have two players. So the board comes into existence with one king on it, of arbitrary colour, and the game is already over.
Time being the 4th dimension all activities are in a sense 4d, so it's 5d chess that JD Vance is playing with this deliberate stoking of anti-Americanism in Europe to encourage the populists to join the mainstream in rearming the continent against Russia thus getting America off the hook and able to declare peace with honour in Ukraine whilst saving huge sums of money. He's not just a pretty face, Vance.
As chess is played on a board, arguably that's only two spacial dimensions so as it takes place over time, it's a 3D game. True, the pieces exist in 3D when the game is played physically but that's a matter of practicality; conceptually it exists on a plane.
Two quick remarks about NAFTA: It was proposed by Ronald Reagan, negotiated by George H. W. Bush, and confirmed in the Senate, thanks in part to the leadership of Bill Clinton. (Clinton favored freer trade, as a traditional southern Democrat would.)
Second, so far as I know, it has never been particularly popular in Canada, Mexico, or the United States.
In Mexico, populists argue about the nature of the deal. But the enormous boost that NAFTA gave to the Mexican economy is accepted across politics. Ending it would collapse a swathe of the Mexican economy (and do massive damage in the US).
NAFTA doesn't exist any more. It was renegotiated and superceded by USMCA in 2020. I doubt USMCA will last much longer as the US is now (as of today) in breach of the agreement because of the Trump Tariffs.
Yes - I was using NAFTA in the general sense of the agreement. One freeish trade zone from Canada to Mexico.
Trump is trying to kill it - because a meme among his voters is that all their jobs went across the borders.
First we have to decide if there are zero squares or one. One, I suppose. But then you can't have two players. So the board comes into existence with one king on it, of arbitrary colour, and the game is already over.
If there is one square, does that not determine the colour of the King?
@ZelenskyyUa I would like to reiterate Ukraine’s commitment to peace.
None of us wants an endless war. Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody wants peace more than Ukrainians. My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts.
We are ready to work fast to end the war, and the first stages could be the release of prisoners and truce in the sky — ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure — and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same. Then we want to move very fast through all next stages and to work with the US to agree a strong final deal.
We do really value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence. And we remember the moment when things changed when President Trump provided Ukraine with Javelins. We are grateful for this.
Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be. It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is time to make things right. We would like future cooperation and communication to be constructive.
Regarding the agreement on minerals and security, Ukraine is ready to sign it in any time and in any convenient format. We see this agreement as a step toward greater security and solid security guarantees, and I truly hope it will work effectively.
Unavoidable and really he had no choice but it makes me sick to my stomach that the country which was invaded is being treated as the invader .
For what it's worth, it's entirely possible there are no commercial deposits of Rare Earths to exploit. So, the whole thing is largely performative.
I can't say I have much sympathy with Vance. For some time now he's been dining out on being the archetypal MAGA loudmouth who slags off every other country that isn't the US. Now we're all supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt when he employs clumsy, ambiguous phrasing. Too bad. If he didn't want to be thought a twit he shouldn't have gone out of his way to act like one.
It could be 4D chess. Anti-Americanism in Europe is a stronger force than pro-Putinism and might be enough to get the likes of Mélenchon and Wagenknecht to switch sides.
I think we've learnt by now that it's not 4D chess.
First we have to decide if there are zero squares or one. One, I suppose. But then you can't have two players. So the board comes into existence with one king on it, of arbitrary colour, and the game is already over.
If there is one square, does that not determine the colour of the King?
Then there are two possible starting boards, since one cannot turn the board 180 degrees to make it correct for each king. So the game cannot exist. Or it is the board which is arbitrarily chosen to come into existence.
I can't say I have much sympathy with Vance. For some time now he's been dining out on being the archetypal MAGA loudmouth who slags off every other country that isn't the US. Now we're all supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt when he employs clumsy, ambiguous phrasing. Too bad. If he didn't want to be thought a twit he shouldn't have gone out of his way to act like one.
It could be 4D chess. Anti-Americanism in Europe is a stronger force than pro-Putinism and might be enough to get the likes of Mélenchon and Wagenknecht to switch sides.
I think we've learnt by now that it's not 4D chess.
Time being the 4th dimension all activities are in a sense 4d, so it's 5d chess that JD Vance is playing with this deliberate stoking of anti-Americanism in Europe to encourage the populists to join the mainstream in rearming the continent against Russia thus getting America off the hook and able to declare peace with honour in Ukraine whilst saving huge sums of money. He's not just a pretty face, Vance.
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
What about the unicorns and me dating Jessica Chastain. Don't forget those in your entirely pointless santa what would you like for christmas list.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
It will be, er, interesting to see how that pans out in practice.
I can't say I have much sympathy with Vance. For some time now he's been dining out on being the archetypal MAGA loudmouth who slags off every other country that isn't the US. Now we're all supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt when he employs clumsy, ambiguous phrasing. Too bad. If he didn't want to be thought a twit he shouldn't have gone out of his way to act like one.
It could be 4D chess. Anti-Americanism in Europe is a stronger force than pro-Putinism and might be enough to get the likes of Mélenchon and Wagenknecht to switch sides.
I think we've learnt by now that it's not 4D chess.
Is there such a thing as 1D chess?
It'd be pretty limited. A lot of castling maybe.
Philosophical question: in 0D chess, is every piece a pawn or is every piece a queen?
First we have to decide if there are zero squares or one. One, I suppose. But then you can't have two players. So the board comes into existence with one king on it, of arbitrary colour, and the game is already over.
0D chess cannot exist. It would mean no space and no time: neither place for pieces nor time to elapse for moves to occur.
It might be possible to play 1+1D chess on a line, over time. However, presumably you could only have one piece stationed in front the king and unless it was a rook or queen, every match would end in a draw (and either a one-move win for black or a draw with those high-value pieces)
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment.
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
I know he misses more often than he hits but I do like this piece from AEP today. I hope he is right about what will be done as well as about what should be done.
It’s weird to read an AEP piece that I 100% agree with.
This is the perfect time for German and Italian car companies (who aren’t doing well with the move to electric) to move into a new world of defense procurement
I have an Italian electric car, and it's surprisingly good! We got the new Fiat 500e, and it's the best non-Tesla, non-Rivian I've ever driven. (It beats the execrable Ford e-Mustang into a crooked hat.)
The Fiat 500e alongside a lot of the other cars are good it’s just that not that many people are buying them and china and Korea are chipping away at the market. So I suspect no matter what happens VW will be selling less cars going forward than they used to which means there are factories with appropriately skilled staff waiting to be repurposed over the next few years
Fewer cars.
I had to drive a Fiat 500e from Aberdeen to Lincolnshire. God that was a tough trip.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
I'm going to show you all the stamp. The official, regal, elaborate imprimatur of His Majesty's Revenue and Customs. The Seal of Royal Approval. This thing that has taken well over a year, five earthly seasons, to be stamped in all in stampiness in the stamp-ready place on the page that has to be stampethed
Prepare to be impressed
Or prepare to remember fondly the old off topic button.
Be sympathetic for poor little @Leon . His shtick has been praising Trump and Farage, and now he doesn't know what to say.
I think Trump is splendid and right on Woke and DEI, I think he is catastrophic on economics and most foreign policy, and the latter outweighs the former
This is why, before the election, I constructed my elaborate and oft-repeated metaphor: the voter in the USA is like someone stuck on a melting ice floe heading to warmer waters (= the drift to catastrophic Woke-ism etc). However on the ice floe there is also a hungry polar bear - the bear is Trump
The voter has a gun - his vote
What to do? The ice floe on its present course will eventually melt and you will definitely drown, but that will take a while. Right now the proximate, immediate danger is the hungry bear, who could maul or eat you any minute - so there is no choice: you have to shoot the bear, first. Despatch Trump, vote him down, then think about the mortally dangerous drift of the ice floe beneath you
That's what I said before the US election, Trump was the bigger immediate threat
Didn't you also say that voting for Trump was like having a baby.
I've actually found the original comment where I carefully constructed this metaphor. October 2023
"I think Wokeness is much worse than Trump. In all seriousness. You don't understand
However Wokeness is a generational challenge to us all and can only be defeated over decades. Trump is a more proximate and immediate danger, to the most powerful democracy in the West, so Trump must not win in 2024
To adapt an analogy of my own, we are trapped on an ice floe, the ice floe is heading to the warm sea where it will eventually melt and we will definitely drown. The sea current carrying us is: Wokeness
However, sharing this same ice floe with us is a polar bear. That's Trump. It doesn't matter if we manage to steer the ice floe in a different direction if the polar bear comes over and eats several of our limbs in the meantime
Ergo, we have to shoot the polar bear first, then work out how to stop drowning"
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
But these are pipe dreams at present.
Lots of nukes for Ukraine. Say 10,000 or so. Big fuck off ones.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
And people slag off Joe for his pardons. I mean, c'mon.
"Swiss chocolate maker Lindt & Sprüngli will step up its supplies of chocolate to Canada from Europe to avoid the impact of Canadian tariffs imposed to counter the latest US customs being imposed by President Donald Trump."
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
But these are pipe dreams at present.
Did you just find yourself just briefly in that parallel Universe where Boris Johnson remains World King?
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the US armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
Two quick remarks about NAFTA: It was proposed by Ronald Reagan, negotiated by George H. W. Bush, and confirmed in the Senate, thanks in part to the leadership of Bill Clinton. (Clinton favored freer trade, as a traditional southern Democrat would.)
Second, so far as I know, it has never been particularly popular in Canada, Mexico, or the United States.
In Mexico, populists argue about the nature of the deal. But the enormous boost that NAFTA gave to the Mexican economy is accepted across politics. Ending it would collapse a swathe of the Mexican economy (and do massive damage in the US).
NAFTA doesn't exist any more. It was renegotiated and superceded by USMCA in 2020. I doubt USMCA will last much longer as the US is now (as of today) in breach of the agreement because of the Trump Tariffs.
And who negotiated, signed, and praised that as the "fairest and most beneficial" trade deal ever ?
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
But these are pipe dreams at present.
Lots of nukes for Ukraine. Say 10,000 or so. Big fuck off ones.
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
But these are pipe dreams at present.
Did you just find yourself just briefly in that parallel Universe where Boris Johnson remains World King?
"Swiss chocolate maker Lindt & Sprüngli will step up its supplies of chocolate to Canada from Europe to avoid the impact of Canadian tariffs imposed to counter the latest US customs being imposed by President Donald Trump."
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
Erm...about that...
'Trump calls for takeover of governance of Washington, D.C.'
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the US armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
So you are predicting military coups against the Commander in Chief?
Two quick remarks about NAFTA: It was proposed by Ronald Reagan, negotiated by George H. W. Bush, and confirmed in the Senate, thanks in part to the leadership of Bill Clinton. (Clinton favored freer trade, as a traditional southern Democrat would.)
Second, so far as I know, it has never been particularly popular in Canada, Mexico, or the United States.
In Mexico, populists argue about the nature of the deal. But the enormous boost that NAFTA gave to the Mexican economy is accepted across politics. Ending it would collapse a swathe of the Mexican economy (and do massive damage in the US).
NAFTA doesn't exist any more. It was renegotiated and superceded by USMCA in 2020. I doubt USMCA will last much longer as the US is now (as of today) in breach of the agreement because of the Trump Tariffs.
And who negotiated, signed, and praised that as the "fairest and most beneficial" trade deal ever ?
oooo. I forget. I have brief flashing memories of orange skin but I think I have wiped it from my mind.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
Erm...about that...
'Trump calls for takeover of governance of Washington, D.C.'
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
But these are pipe dreams at present.
Did you just find yourself just briefly in that parallel Universe where Boris Johnson remains World King?
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
I wish I were as observant. Every time I try and accuse @Leon of being a Pillock I end up calling him a Pollock.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
Yup, he’s going to have to own this. This is of his making and he cannot blame the last administration.
JPow will be interesting on Friday.
Of course he can - and will - blame the last administration. You know how his mouth and brain works. Whether there's any justice in such blame is an entirely different matter.
By the way, and marginally related, it's two weeks or so to the next US spending crunch / federal shutdown. One to keep an eye on.
Well he *can* and *will* just as the Tories blamed labour after 14 years, but Im talking in the perception of the public and I don’t think he will get the free pass he wants.
These federal shutdowns seem to come around with ever increasing regularity these days, or maybe that’s just how it seems now.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why? Trump imposed them and Canadian exporters would be hit even if Trudeau didn't retaliate, which his voters demanded he did.
US consumers will just note when their grocery bills go up the impact of Trump's decision
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the US armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
So you are predicting military coups against the Commander in Chief?
No but he can only command the FBI and Secret Service and military and even then as the military and FBI and Secret Service also take an oath to defend the US constitution too that loyalty is split for them
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
Telling the truth, getting in ahead of the fallout. Seems pretty smart framing to me
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
I find this to be a vanishingly unlikely outcome except for the most idiotic among Canadians.
Far and away the most significant event of today has been the announcement of increased oil production by both Saudi Arabia and Russia. This has come presumably from Washington with the aim of helping the cost of living in the USA but it will help a lot of other countries as well.
Bringing oil prices back down to around $50 - $60 a barrel would be a huge step in alleviating concerns over the cost of living across the west and, in tandem with interest rate reductions, might very well not only promote some growth but will help turn economic sentiment round in a more positive direction.
We know "the cost of living" has been a huge factor in the removal of Governments of all stripes at recent elections and presumably Trump and his advisers are aware of this and their number one priority has to be to convince Americans they are better off under him than they were under Biden.
Starmer may well gain some traction from this if the economy improves under his stewardship (he and Reeves will take the credit even if it's precious little to do with them).
It also now seems clear the Saudis are in the Trump camp - perhaps he'll tap them for some of the Gaza reconstruction costs.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
People who think Ukraine invaded Russia could no doubt be persuaded Canada started the trade war. But what % of Americans is that? Nothing like a majority surely.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
"Swiss chocolate maker Lindt & Sprüngli will step up its supplies of chocolate to Canada from Europe to avoid the impact of Canadian tariffs imposed to counter the latest US customs being imposed by President Donald Trump."
I know he misses more often than he hits but I do like this piece from AEP today. I hope he is right about what will be done as well as about what should be done.
It’s weird to read an AEP piece that I 100% agree with.
This is the perfect time for German and Italian car companies (who aren’t doing well with the move to electric) to move into a new world of defense procurement
I have an Italian electric car, and it's surprisingly good! We got the new Fiat 500e, and it's the best non-Tesla, non-Rivian I've ever driven. (It beats the execrable Ford e-Mustang into a crooked hat.)
The Fiat 500e alongside a lot of the other cars are good it’s just that not that many people are buying them and china and Korea are chipping away at the market. So I suspect no matter what happens VW will be selling less cars going forward than they used to which means there are factories with appropriately skilled staff waiting to be repurposed over the next few years
Fewer cars.
I had to drive a Fiat 500e from Aberdeen to Lincolnshire. God that was a tough trip.
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
But these are pipe dreams at present.
Did you just find yourself just briefly in that parallel Universe where Boris Johnson remains World King?
1. British households and businesses have spent too little and saved too much since the financial crisis. Private debt is way lower than it used to be. As a result government tax take is down and public debt is higher.
2. Labour came in on a manifesto of not raising VAT or income tax and employee NI, the big earners for the government.
3. Government needs more money and the economy needs more demand
Hence spend for victory. Here’s the bones of the speech: “We face the biggest security challenge since WW2, and we must fund a huge expansion in the defence budget while making sure we fix potholes, keep crime off the streets and reduce waiting lists. We promised not to raise tax. But you can do your bit. For every pound you spend on that new car (not Tesla) or that home extension or that trip to the cinema, or for you businesses that new IT system or warehouse automation, 20p goes straight to our fighting fund to get Britain growing and stick it to Putin. So I want you to go out and spend. Spend like you’ve never spent before. Your country needs you”
The people with the demand don't have the money.
The people with the money don't have the demand.
It leads back to housing, student debt and intergenerational inequality generally.
“Make saving expensive again”?
The previous govt was moving along those lines by lowering the amount of interest you could get before paying tax.
What Rachel Reeves could do is lower the limit you can pay into a cash ISA. It has been mooted.
If your savings cannot beat inflation then, apart from a buffer for an emergency, what is the point of it.
Other than house deposits, wedding funds, holidays, car replacements... absolutely nothing.
We started an ISA for each of our childen when they were born which was enough to pay for their maintainance fees at Uni and still leave enough for a house deposit. £100 a month each over 18 years with Skandia/Old Mutual (or whoever they have now become).
I’ve thought for a while now the govt, for the younger generations pensions, the govt should, for every child who turns 18, plonk £5,000 into a S&S ISA into something like an S&P 500 tracker, with low cost fees, which reinvests dividends and allow the power of compounding to do its work, and they would be able'to access this at the age of 67.
Blair started Child Trust Funds in 2001 for new babies with smaller sums - £250 to £500, with smaller installments at 5, 11 and 16; Cameron killed it in 2011. Worth about £1500 now.
TBF to Cameron, he did do auto-enrolment in pension schemes in 2012, which has resulted in long-term tax free savings contributions of 2% of salary for many (tax relief on 8% contributions). I think that's the maths.
It may now be from age 18.
That's probably better than a lump sum at 18.
It’s the saving early that matters with the effect of compounding that does the heavy lifting.
What you’re talking about is a workplace pension, I’m talking about something to effectively replace the state pension for younger people based on a state contribution.
Many child trust funds seem to have been victims of predatory charges from the finance industry. Seen a few stories about how people have got very little out of them due to charges.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
I find this to be a vanishingly unlikely outcome except for the most idiotic among Canadians.
I'm not talking about Canadians but Americans. The Canadians want to make Americans in red states feel the pain so they turn against Trump but they may instead become more hostile to Canada.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
Not lame duck on this TBF.
Trudeau is a highly unpopular PM who seems to have judged the Canadian national mood spot on.
A text to all Tory MPs sent by Tory chief whip Rebecca Harris, and first reported by the Spectator, reads: “We understand that there are many concerns about the unfolding events around Ukraine and US involvement.
“We do not need to tweet all of our thoughts in real time. When it comes to defence and national security, we need to raise the threshold for what needs to be said publicly and ensure the facts are clear first.”
Bloody hell, some actually useful leadership from the Tories. MPs need to STFU and stop posting the first thing that comes into their idiotic brains on social media.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
And people slag off Joe for his pardons. I mean, c'mon.
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Force Majeure analogy: West and East Germany The logical border is one that can be defended by force. That depends on the warfighters (sorry) and materiel in theatre. If a Euroforce can be placed in Ukraine in the same way as NATO tanks were in West Germany during WW2, I can see the Dneiper becoming the defacto border, creating a West Ukraine and East Ukraine. It would split Ukraine roughly 50/50 and would increase the Russian occupied Ukraine from around 25% to about 50%.
My preference analogy: North and South Korea If we can get the Americans onside, I can see giving eastern Kherson , southern Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk, Donetsk and Crimea to Russia and keeping Kharkiv and Dnipropetrovsk in Western Ukraine. The border can be a neutral zone about 20 miles deep and mined to fuck and back. The split is around 70/30 in favour of the Ukrainians.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the US armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
What gives you the idea that Trump abides by the Constitution?
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
I find this to be a vanishingly unlikely outcome except for the most idiotic among Canadians.
I'm not talking about Canadians but Americans. The Canadians want to make Americans in red states feel the pain so they turn against Trump but they may instead become more hostile to Canada.
And thus casus belli. It's more plausible than the Russian one they swallowed.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
I find this to be a vanishingly unlikely outcome except for the most idiotic among Canadians.
I'm not talking about Canadians but Americans. The Canadians want to make Americans in red states feel the pain so they turn against Trump but they may instead become more hostile to Canada.
I know he misses more often than he hits but I do like this piece from AEP today. I hope he is right about what will be done as well as about what should be done.
It’s weird to read an AEP piece that I 100% agree with.
This is the perfect time for German and Italian car companies (who aren’t doing well with the move to electric) to move into a new world of defense procurement
I have an Italian electric car, and it's surprisingly good! We got the new Fiat 500e, and it's the best non-Tesla, non-Rivian I've ever driven. (It beats the execrable Ford e-Mustang into a crooked hat.)
The Fiat 500e alongside a lot of the other cars are good it’s just that not that many people are buying them and china and Korea are chipping away at the market. So I suspect no matter what happens VW will be selling less cars going forward than they used to which means there are factories with appropriately skilled staff waiting to be repurposed over the next few years
Fewer cars.
I had to drive a Fiat 500e from Aberdeen to Lincolnshire. God that was a tough trip.
Was that the old one or the new one?
Aberdeen to Lincolnshire is 400 miles or probably 2 recharges on the way
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
I find this to be a vanishingly unlikely outcome except for the most idiotic among Canadians.
I'm not talking about Canadians but Americans. The Canadians want to make Americans in red states feel the pain so they turn against Trump but they may instead become more hostile to Canada.
Even if Trudeau did sod all Americans in red states and purple states would see their shopping bills go up if they buy any Canadian, Mexican or Chinese products unless and until US farmers and manufacturers can fill the gap. All Trudeau could do is let off US exporters to Canada from tariffs but he can't as Canadian voters want revenge
A text to all Tory MPs sent by Tory chief whip Rebecca Harris, and first reported by the Spectator, reads: “We understand that there are many concerns about the unfolding events around Ukraine and US involvement.
“We do not need to tweet all of our thoughts in real time. When it comes to defence and national security, we need to raise the threshold for what needs to be said publicly and ensure the facts are clear first.”
Bloody hell, some actually useful leadership from the Tories. MPs need to STFU and stop posting the first thing that comes into their idiotic brains on social media.
Bravo Kemi
T'would be a good plan on here tbh.
To be fair, why couldn't they manage such self discipline within they were in Government? The stable door is swingeing off its hinges and the horse is far in the distance.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
And people slag off Joe for his pardons. I mean, c'mon.
Rightly so, it is not a binary choice.
It was clear from what Biden said at the time he was giving them to protect them from a vindictive Trump and boy was he correct to do so. And notibly he didn't give himself one. It was a sad state of affairs it was necessary.
I know he misses more often than he hits but I do like this piece from AEP today. I hope he is right about what will be done as well as about what should be done.
It’s weird to read an AEP piece that I 100% agree with.
This is the perfect time for German and Italian car companies (who aren’t doing well with the move to electric) to move into a new world of defense procurement
I have an Italian electric car, and it's surprisingly good! We got the new Fiat 500e, and it's the best non-Tesla, non-Rivian I've ever driven. (It beats the execrable Ford e-Mustang into a crooked hat.)
The Fiat 500e alongside a lot of the other cars are good it’s just that not that many people are buying them and china and Korea are chipping away at the market. So I suspect no matter what happens VW will be selling less cars going forward than they used to which means there are factories with appropriately skilled staff waiting to be repurposed over the next few years
Fewer cars.
I had to drive a Fiat 500e from Aberdeen to Lincolnshire. God that was a tough trip.
Was that the old one or the new one?
Aberdeen to Lincolnshire is 400 miles or probably 2 recharges on the way
Yep, you'd need to charge twice. Fortunately my one (the new one) goes from 15% to 80% in about 20 minutes (thanks to that small battery), so you're probably not adding too much time to your trip.
With that said... the 500e is a city car, for narrow streets and small parking spots. It's not meant to be a motorway cruiser.
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
Why does he care? He's a lame duck and knows it.
I mean Canada in general would be blamed so it could have the opposite effect to the one intended and actually increase support for Trump.
Not doing something out of fear of being victim-blamed (by the bully) is weak. Not only that, it gives Trump every incentive to do it again.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
It will be, er, interesting to see how that pans out in practice.
Indeed it will. The Truth Social post mentioned by Foxy just about keeps within the bounds of propriety by referring to 'illegal protests' and 'agitators' rather than explicitly saying that protest in itself is sanctionable. The tone of course is threatening. SFAICS a free media and the 1st amendment still exist along with the right to protest; but at the current rate it will be in the queue for attempted executive action fairly soon. There is no shortage of people in USA keeping an eye on the matter.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the US armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
And how did that work out on Jan 6?
No-one in America should trust the constitution to protect them against anything where Trump's personal interests are involved. Just because some 18th century text says something isn't supposed to happen, it doesn't mean it won't.
Anyway, it wouldn't be the military or police detaining Democrat legislators; it'd be a MAGA mob.
Krugman's view is that favoured companies will get tariff exemptions, and that one gets favored status by ... say ... paying to hang out with Donald Trump.
1. British households and businesses have spent too little and saved too much since the financial crisis. Private debt is way lower than it used to be. As a result government tax take is down and public debt is higher.
2. Labour came in on a manifesto of not raising VAT or income tax and employee NI, the big earners for the government.
3. Government needs more money and the economy needs more demand
Hence spend for victory. Here’s the bones of the speech: “We face the biggest security challenge since WW2, and we must fund a huge expansion in the defence budget while making sure we fix potholes, keep crime off the streets and reduce waiting lists. We promised not to raise tax. But you can do your bit. For every pound you spend on that new car (not Tesla) or that home extension or that trip to the cinema, or for you businesses that new IT system or warehouse automation, 20p goes straight to our fighting fund to get Britain growing and stick it to Putin. So I want you to go out and spend. Spend like you’ve never spent before. Your country needs you”
The people with the demand don't have the money.
The people with the money don't have the demand.
It leads back to housing, student debt and intergenerational inequality generally.
“Make saving expensive again”?
The previous govt was moving along those lines by lowering the amount of interest you could get before paying tax.
What Rachel Reeves could do is lower the limit you can pay into a cash ISA. It has been mooted.
If your savings cannot beat inflation then, apart from a buffer for an emergency, what is the point of it.
Other than house deposits, wedding funds, holidays, car replacements... absolutely nothing.
We started an ISA for each of our childen when they were born which was enough to pay for their maintainance fees at Uni and still leave enough for a house deposit. £100 a month each over 18 years with Skandia/Old Mutual (or whoever they have now become).
I’ve thought for a while now the govt, for the younger generations pensions, the govt should, for every child who turns 18, plonk £5,000 into a S&S ISA into something like an S&P 500 tracker, with low cost fees, which reinvests dividends and allow the power of compounding to do its work, and they would be able'to access this at the age of 67.
Blair started Child Trust Funds in 2001 for new babies with smaller sums - £250 to £500, with smaller installments at 5, 11 and 16; Cameron killed it in 2011. Worth about £1500 now.
TBF to Cameron, he did do auto-enrolment in pension schemes in 2012, which has resulted in long-term tax free savings contributions of 2% of salary for many (tax relief on 8% contributions). I think that's the maths.
It may now be from age 18.
That's probably better than a lump sum at 18.
I thought the legislation had already been passed for auto-enrolment by the Labour government? It was in the 2008 Pensions Act, and I assume gave employers significant notice, so actually began after Cameron was in power.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the US armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
And how did that work out on Jan 6?
No-one in America should trust the constitution to protect them against anything where Trump's personal interests are involved. Just because some 18th century text says something isn't supposed to happen, it doesn't mean it won't.
Anyway, it wouldn't be the military or police detaining Democrat legislators; it'd be a MAGA mob.
The DC police and National Guard arrested the protestors and Jan 6th MAGA mob
Krugman's view is that favoured companies will get tariff exemptions, and that one gets favored status by ... say ... paying to hang out with Donald Trump.
How long until like in Russia you can pay the President to send the goons (tax police, seriously) round to your business rivals? Don't worry about R&D, paying better wages, or any of that old-fashioned nonsense, just get rid of the opposition before they get rid of you!
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
But these are pipe dreams at present.
Did you just find yourself just briefly in that parallel Universe where Boris Johnson remains World King?
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the US armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
And how did that work out on Jan 6?
No-one in America should trust the constitution to protect them against anything where Trump's personal interests are involved. Just because some 18th century text says something isn't supposed to happen, it doesn't mean it won't.
Anyway, it wouldn't be the military or police detaining Democrat legislators; it'd be a MAGA mob.
The final authority in the human condition - what might be called the backstop - is force. Always has been and always will be. In the USA, as here, the final word is with the populace and the military, not the courts, congress, the president or anyone else. The difference between now and is that the point is relevant.
Here’s a challenge for all of you: Let’s suppose that you could wave a magic wand and impose a “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. What would the elements of that be?
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
I don't think territorial concessions by Russia. That would be akin to the mistakes made at the time of Versailles. I do think a return to the pre 2014 borders for Ukraine. Membership of NATO (or whatever replaces it) and the EU as they themselves see fit. All funds seixed from Russia to be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. Agree of course about the return of children, POWs and anyone else removed by the Russians. Also very uch agree with Putin, Lavrov and others being tried.
But these are pipe dreams at present.
Did you just find yourself just briefly in that parallel Universe where Boris Johnson remains World King?
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
It isn't, the US armed forces take a vow to uphold the Constitution as well as the President's orders and the 4th amendment prohibits unlawful detention without warrant
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
And how did that work out on Jan 6?
No-one in America should trust the constitution to protect them against anything where Trump's personal interests are involved. Just because some 18th century text says something isn't supposed to happen, it doesn't mean it won't.
Anyway, it wouldn't be the military or police detaining Democrat legislators; it'd be a MAGA mob.
The DC police and National Guard arrested the protestors and Jan 6th MAGA mob
Not on the day, they didn't.
Worth noting that the DC National guard is under the president's command.
Krugman's view is that favoured companies will get tariff exemptions, and that one gets favored status by ... say ... paying to hang out with Donald Trump.
What's the betting they shorted the market before crashing it with tariffs ?
From Jan6 pardons to banning antigovernment protests under threat of arrest took only 4 weeks.
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
If I were the Bidens, Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi and Harris amongst several thousand others, I think I might be looking to relocate to Europe, Canada or Australasia.
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
1st amendment of US constitution 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
HY, like NATO the Constitution is dead. 1st Amendment rights, they're gone. If repeal of amendments requires 2/3 majority ( I can't exactly remember the figures) a third of Congress can be detained until votes have been cleared. The political Marquis of Queensbury rules are no more.
Like the Enabling Act under Hitler?
2026 is the last chance to turn it around I think.
If the GOP holds Congress, then it could well be the end of US democracy as we've known it during our lifetimes. By 2028 they could have rendered the presidency unwinnable by democratic means.
If that sounds nuts, so did most of the warnings last year, since borne out. In the space of a couple of months.
Yup, he’s going to have to own this. This is of his making and he cannot blame the last administration.
JPow will be interesting on Friday.
Of course he can - and will - blame the last administration. You know how his mouth and brain works. Whether there's any justice in such blame is an entirely different matter.
By the way, and marginally related, it's two weeks or so to the next US spending crunch / federal shutdown. One to keep an eye on.
Well he *can* and *will* just as the Tories blamed labour after 14 years, but Im talking in the perception of the public and I don’t think he will get the free pass he wants.
These federal shutdowns seem to come around with ever increasing regularity these days, or maybe that’s just how it seems now.
Yes: it's a sign of the increased division and partisanship in America. Debt Ceiling crunches too (there's another one of them heading down the tracks as well, probably mid-summer, unless there's an agreement first). That said, there's not been a proper shutdown since Trump's first term, although things ran close several times under Biden.
My quasi-antique lacquered Mandalay box from Bogyoke Market in Rangoon turns out, as hoped, to be the perfect receptacle for my spare slow-release Tramadol, and fits, aesthetically, with my handwoven mochilla bag made by the mystical Kogi tribe of the Tairona mountains of north Colombia, which I use to store my sachets of Japanese Dashi stock powder
Comments
Trump is trying to kill it - because a meme among his voters is that all their jobs went across the borders.
* ONTARIO TO ISSUE 25% EXPORT TAX ON ELECTRICITY TO US: WSJ
https://bsky.app/profile/carlquintanilla.bsky.social/post/3ljkstnwbk22p
I would ask "How long to the Enabling Act?", but I thinkTrump doesn't think he needs to bother.
Some are obvious: First, the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped should be returned, immediately.
Last, Putin should be tried and punished for his war crimes. As should some of those who followed his orders.
(The first would be just; the second, by punishing the man who began this war, would make it more likely the peace would be lasting.)
What else should be in such a peace agreement? I think territorial concessions by Russia would be appropriate — if they are approved by referendums in the areas affected.
An exercise like this could help us clarify what our goals should be.
@josh_wingrove
*S&P 500 ERASES ELECTION GAIN, WIPING OUT $3.4 TRILLION IN VALUE
Phew, just removed the rogue apostrophes applied by autocorrect.
Return of Nuclear weapons to Ukrainian soil.
Putin on trial.
Trump can say what he wants, he can't arrest non violent protestors expressing their views without 2/3 of Congress also voting to repeal the first amendment. He can stop funding universities and can order arrest of violent agitators but that is it
It might be possible to play 1+1D chess on a line, over time. However, presumably you could only have one piece stationed in front the king and unless it was a rook or queen, every match would end in a draw (and either a one-move win for black or a draw with those high-value pieces)
But these are pipe dreams at present.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvgpdk4257zt
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
The Washington DC police also take their orders from the Mayor, a Democrat, not the President
'Trump calls for takeover of governance of Washington, D.C.'
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-calls-takeover-governance-washington-dc-2025-02-20/
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1896957813420666906
Trudeau: "I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don't want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally. We don't want to see you hurt either. But your government has chosen to do this to you. As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically."
It's a shame our Government couldn't have got out of the blocks as quickly.
These federal shutdowns seem to come around with ever increasing regularity these days, or maybe that’s just how it seems now.
US consumers will just note when their grocery bills go up the impact of Trump's decision
Far and away the most significant event of today has been the announcement of increased oil production by both Saudi Arabia and Russia. This has come presumably from Washington with the aim of helping the cost of living in the USA but it will help a lot of other countries as well.
Bringing oil prices back down to around $50 - $60 a barrel would be a huge step in alleviating concerns over the cost of living across the west and, in tandem with interest rate reductions, might very well not only promote some growth but will help turn economic sentiment round in a more positive direction.
We know "the cost of living" has been a huge factor in the removal of Governments of all stripes at recent elections and presumably Trump and his advisers are aware of this and their number one priority has to be to convince Americans they are better off under him than they were under Biden.
Starmer may well gain some traction from this if the economy improves under his stewardship (he and Reeves will take the credit even if it's precious little to do with them).
It also now seems clear the Saudis are in the Trump camp - perhaps he'll tap them for some of the Gaza reconstruction costs.
What you’re talking about is a workplace pension, I’m talking about something to effectively replace the state pension for younger people based on a state contribution.
Many child trust funds seem to have been victims of predatory charges from the finance industry. Seen a few stories about how people have got very little out of them due to charges.
No one other than (fairly stupid) partisans on the left thinks Trump is truly going to implement 20% tariffs on everything across the board...
https://x.com/Geiger_Capital/status/1855371347481804945
Trudeau is a highly unpopular PM who seems to have judged the Canadian national mood spot on.
analogy: West and East Germany
The logical border is one that can be defended by force. That depends on the warfighters (sorry) and materiel in theatre. If a Euroforce can be placed in Ukraine in the same way as NATO tanks were in West Germany during WW2, I can see the Dneiper becoming the defacto border, creating a West Ukraine and East Ukraine. It would split Ukraine roughly 50/50 and would increase the Russian occupied Ukraine from around 25% to about 50%.
My preference
analogy: North and South Korea
If we can get the Americans onside, I can see giving eastern Kherson , southern Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk, Donetsk and Crimea to Russia and keeping Kharkiv and Dnipropetrovsk in Western Ukraine. The border can be a neutral zone about 20 miles deep and mined to fuck and back. The split is around 70/30 in favour of the Ukrainians.
It's more plausible than the Russian one they swallowed.
Of course.
With that said... the 500e is a city car, for narrow streets and small parking spots. It's not meant to be a motorway cruiser.
Business leaders are paying as much as $5,000,000 to meet one-on-one with the president at his Florida compound, sources tell WIRED, while others are paying $1,000,000 apiece to dine with him in a group setting.
https://www.wired.com/story/people-paying-millions-donald-trump-mar-a-lago/
No-one in America should trust the constitution to protect them against anything where Trump's personal interests are involved. Just because some 18th century text says something isn't supposed to happen, it doesn't mean it won't.
Anyway, it wouldn't be the military or police detaining Democrat legislators; it'd be a MAGA mob.
Worth noting that the DC National guard is under the president's command.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/01/world/canada/canada-us-border-immigration.html
The number of people trying to cross illegally into Canada has gone through the roof.
If the GOP holds Congress, then it could well be the end of US democracy as we've known it during our lifetimes.
By 2028 they could have rendered the presidency unwinnable by democratic means.
If that sounds nuts, so did most of the warnings last year, since borne out.
In the space of a couple of months.
I know PB-ers were worried, they can rest easy