I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
What I can't understand is why the rates are so high - they are genuinely a fair and up to date reflection of rents charged, but those rents should be very small given the lack of viability for many of these businesses. Demand should be low.
So wtf is propping up these rents?
Income support / universal credit
So says someone who's clearly never had to survive on £92 per week.
Executives of US defense contractors will no longer be allowed to make more than $5 million unless they build "new and modern production plants."
Labour backbenchers will be envious of this kind of approach.
Labour backbenchers, if they don't view private business as fundamentally a criminal enterprise, otherwise view them as an instrument of public policy and a cash cow.
The productive economy is there to have its pockets picked to reward the unproductive economy.
We have a labour business team made up,of people who’ve never run in, or worked in, a business. Just charities, NGOs and the like. Utterly useless.
But this is just letting a Conservative plan play out, isn't it? The previous Chancellor didn't announce plans to keep the reductions going, or leave any slack in the kitty to fund it. Did he?
(A bit like the way that the temporary fuel duty cut was always going to stop next year, every year. See also how quickly the Triple Lock and Winter Fuel Payments went from innovations to Fundamental English Rights that you can find in Magna Carta if you look hard enough. If Rishi's Dishies/Eat Out To Help Out had continued for a bit longer, that would also have become an inalienable thing.)
Conservatives have no right to complain of this being built into the countries budget, as they did it.
You don’t really get this whole free speech thing do you? They have the right to complain about whatever they like
I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
What I can't understand is why the rates are so high - they are genuinely a fair and up to date reflection of rents charged, but those rents should be very small given the lack of viability for many of these businesses. Demand should be low.
So wtf is propping up these rents?
Those business that don’t do business? They do pay huge rents to the landlords. As well as lots of tax.
So that puts up business rates in the area.
Why do you think that so little has been done about them? The taxman gets a pile. The council sees a joint rent being paid…
Executives of US defense contractors will no longer be allowed to make more than $5 million unless they build "new and modern production plants."
Labour backbenchers will be envious of this kind of approach.
Labour backbenchers, if they don't view private business as fundamentally a criminal enterprise, otherwise view them as an instrument of public policy and a cash cow.
The productive economy is there to have its pockets picked to reward the unproductive economy.
We have a labour business team made up,of people who’ve never run in, or worked in, a business. Just charities, NGOs and the like. Utterly useless.
But this is just letting a Conservative plan play out, isn't it? The previous Chancellor didn't announce plans to keep the reductions going, or leave any slack in the kitty to fund it. Did he?
(A bit like the way that the temporary fuel duty cut was always going to stop next year, every year. See also how quickly the Triple Lock and Winter Fuel Payments went from innovations to Fundamental English Rights that you can find in Magna Carta if you look hard enough. If Rishi's Dishies/Eat Out To Help Out had continued for a bit longer, that would also have become an inalienable thing.)
Conservatives have no right to complain of this being built into the countries budget, as they did it.
You don’t really get this whole free speech thing do you? They have the right to complain about whatever they like
Oh dear, we don't like the policy that we made.
Doesn’t work like that. New budget / new finance act. Government could have changed it so they own it
The best video evidence right now shows ICE shot a woman while she was attempting to drive away from rather than run over a federal agent. Unless something else comes out, a trigger happy fed just executed an American citizen and the Trump admin wants to cover it up. This isn’t partisan. If you think it’s partisan to demand transparency and accountability from the government in cases like these, you have terminal brain worms. https://x.com/emeriticus/status/2008973223401279661
.@POTUS can still claim a great victory for freedom, stability & international order if he backs Venezuela’s rightfully elected leaders & lets Venezuelans govern themselves. If not, he will undermine all of those things — and, ultimately, America’s place in the world.
I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
What I can't understand is why the rates are so high - they are genuinely a fair and up to date reflection of rents charged, but those rents should be very small given the lack of viability for many of these businesses. Demand should be low.
So wtf is propping up these rents?
Income support / universal credit
It's business rents. Commercial landlords are keeping rents high, landlord of our local shopping centre is happy for most units to be empty. They'll offer an initial discounted period but then up it to a level that makes the business unsustainable. AIUI it's to maintain the pretence that all the units could be let at the high rate rather than admit the centre is overvalued
The US will always have a special place in my heart, having studied in Massachusetts and worked in California.
I’m proud to kick off celebrations for @America250, the 250th anniversary since the declaration of independence, honouring our shared history and close future.
I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
What I can't understand is why the rates are so high - they are genuinely a fair and up to date reflection of rents charged, but those rents should be very small given the lack of viability for many of these businesses. Demand should be low.
So wtf is propping up these rents?
Those business that don’t do business? They do pay huge rents to the landlords. As well as lots of tax.
So that puts up business rates in the area.
Why do you think that so little has been done about them? The taxman gets a pile. The council sees a joint rent being paid…
Exactly.
Why should the government object to money laundering as long as they get their cut?
Why should local authorities object to interesting, innovative shop-fronts opening in their town centres?
...I got told off by some dimwit on here this morning about quoting a sub sample of 2000 voters...
That was me. The number in the subsample is not relevant. The weights are. If the poll is weighted then the weights being applied will be national weights, so the subsamples are inaccurately weighted (unless the local weights match the national weights, and they usually don't). This is why subsamples are usually deprecated on PB.
Well, the number is relevant because of sampling error, so Stodge is right to say 2,000 is more than enough. The problem is it isn't the only source of error.
I think sub-sample analysis is perfectly fine as long as you state what you're up to and the limitations.
No, no, no, no!
It has been established since (from memory) the late 2010s that the error from British opinion polls is not derivable from the sample size, because of the self-selection and weighting elements. This is why the BPC insist that BPC member polls publish their estimate of the expected error. That change came in some time in the last ten years.
"...All polls are subject to a wide range of potential sources of error. On the basis of the historical record of the polls at recent general elections, there is a 9 in 10 chance that the true value of a party’s support lies within 4 points of the estimates provided by this poll, and a 2 in 3 chance that they lie within 2 points..."
In situations like this there is no mathematical justification for extracting a subsample from the whole and calling it valid. It's the polling equivalent of "zoom and enhance"
I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
What I can't understand is why the rates are so high - they are genuinely a fair and up to date reflection of rents charged, but those rents should be very small given the lack of viability for many of these businesses. Demand should be low.
So wtf is propping up these rents?
Those business that don’t do business? They do pay huge rents to the landlords. As well as lots of tax.
So that puts up business rates in the area.
Why do you think that so little has been done about them? The taxman gets a pile. The council sees a joint rent being paid…
If that really is the underlying reason it's quite an astonishing scandal of gigantic proportions.
I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
Tom Kerridge enthusiastically supported Labour and SKS before the election. We tried to warn him.
This is what they do. It's in their DNA.
The long saga of business rates and their killing of the high street and hospitality is a project of nearly a decade and multiple administrations. Both main parties had similar plans in their manifestos.
Which is a weak excuse.
Labour are in government now. It's been their choice to levy higher employers NI, higher minimum wages, more employment regulation, more business rates and now, potentially, more restrictions on what they can sell onto them.
No ifs, no buts.
My party is the only one with a meaningful proposal for a better system than business rates. And we’ve had it out there for nearly a decade. Labour and the Tories are 2 cheeks on this one.
...I got told off by some dimwit on here this morning about quoting a sub sample of 2000 voters...
That was me. The number in the subsample is not relevant. The weights are. If the poll is weighted then the weights being applied will be national weights, so the subsamples are inaccurately weighted (unless the local weights match the national weights, and they usually don't). This is why subsamples are usually deprecated on PB.
Well, the number is relevant because of sampling error, so Stodge is right to say 2,000 is more than enough. The problem is it isn't the only source of error.
I think sub-sample analysis is perfectly fine as long as you state what you're up to and the limitations.
No, no, no, no!
It has been established since (from memory) the late 2010s that the error from British opinion polls is not derivable from the sample size, because of the self-selection and weighting elements. This is why the BPC insist that BPC member polls publish their estimate of the expected error. That change came in some time in the last ten years.
"...All polls are subject to a wide range of potential sources of error. On the basis of the historical record of the polls at recent general elections, there is a 9 in 10 chance that the true value of a party’s support lies within 4 points of the estimates provided by this poll, and a 2 in 3 chance that they lie within 2 points..."
In situations like this there is no mathematical justification for extracting a subsample from the whole and calling it valid. It's the polling equivalent of "zoom and enhance"
I think I covered that in my post? The actual number polled is sufficient, but there are loads of other issues with the sample and weighting that means you can't do anything robust with it.
Appreciate you're the expert on this kind of thing so happy to defer. I'd be happy to look at a sub-sample to get a rough idea of where voters of coming from or to, for example.
I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
What I can't understand is why the rates are so high - they are genuinely a fair and up to date reflection of rents charged, but those rents should be very small given the lack of viability for many of these businesses. Demand should be low.
So wtf is propping up these rents?
Those business that don’t do business? They do pay huge rents to the landlords. As well as lots of tax.
So that puts up business rates in the area.
Why do you think that so little has been done about them? The taxman gets a pile. The council sees a joint rent being paid…
If that really is the underlying reason it's quite an astonishing scandal of gigantic proportions.
It’s one of them. Remember how the entire visa scheme for care homes turned out to be bullshit? That kind of scale.
The other big on is holding rents high, rather than crystallising devaluations which would put loans against commercial properties into question. Despite much the property being empty at those rents.
I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
What I can't understand is why the rates are so high - they are genuinely a fair and up to date reflection of rents charged, but those rents should be very small given the lack of viability for many of these businesses. Demand should be low.
So wtf is propping up these rents?
Those business that don’t do business? They do pay huge rents to the landlords. As well as lots of tax.
So that puts up business rates in the area.
Why do you think that so little has been done about them? The taxman gets a pile. The council sees a joint rent being paid…
If that really is the underlying reason it's quite an astonishing scandal of gigantic proportions.
I glanced at the earlier debate about alcohol limits, drinking, driving and pubs.
I'll be heretical - I can quite happily go into a pub, NOT have an alcoholic drink and enjoy myself. I certainly agree with those who assert the pub is a focal point for social life especially in rural communities - yes, and I enjoyed the hospitality of one in Waldron, albeit under unfortunaste circumstances, just before Christmas.
The ending of business rates relief for pubs is a disaster and rather like the Winter Fuel Allowance, the political presentation has been equally catastrophic. Had the relief been extended or an announcement it would be phased out over a three year period (perhaps) been part of the Budget, there'd have been grumblings I'm sure but I know enough about business to understand an immediate 110% increase in a key overhead isn't good news.
Subsidising the existence and maintenance of pubs when you are looking at a £150 billion deficit probably isn't a good idea but this is one of those times when the cost matters much less than the value. That being said, have the Conservatives, LDs, Reform or any other party opposed to the Reeves plan said whether they would re-introduce the Business Rates relief were they to become the Government and at what level?
The business rates changes are going to kill many businesses. They are simply not sustainable and I can see the exchequer actually losing money as so many businesses just shut up shop.
Tom Kerridge was on LBC talking about this. The rates on his pub in Marlow are going up from £50,000 a year to £124,000 a year.
How can any small business survive that sort of change?
What I can't understand is why the rates are so high - they are genuinely a fair and up to date reflection of rents charged, but those rents should be very small given the lack of viability for many of these businesses. Demand should be low.
So wtf is propping up these rents?
Those business that don’t do business? They do pay huge rents to the landlords. As well as lots of tax.
So that puts up business rates in the area.
Why do you think that so little has been done about them? The taxman gets a pile. The council sees a joint rent being paid…
If that really is the underlying reason it's quite an astonishing scandal of gigantic proportions.
It’s one of them. Remember how the entire visa scheme for care homes turned out to be bullshit? That kind of scale.
The other big on is holding rents high, rather than crystallising devaluations which would put loans against commercial properties into question. Despite much the property being empty at those rents.
@LisaDNews BREAKING: The Trump administration plans to put money raised from seizure of Venezuelan oil into bank accounts *outside* the U.S. Treasury -- they told lawmakers today per multiple sources familiar.
Sources said they understood these as similar or decidedly "off-shore" accounts.
I know they already tried to spin it 'domestic terrorism', but it will be interesting/terrifying to see if the regime gets any blowback at all for shooting a young white woman multiple times in the face for no good reason.
orange and musk already spinning that she was trying to run people over in a stationary vehicle.
Not sure she was aiming at the ICE guy, just trying to get away. Law enforcement in the USA all over the country are trigger happy in situations like this.
If I’m interpreting that correctly he shot her from the side though the driver window not from the front? Ie she was already past him and clearly about to head down the road
According to this thread there was also a bullet hole in the windscreen. It looks like the first shot could arguably be self-defence. The wheels are pointing away from him but maybe he doesn't know that and the law will give him the benefit of the doubt. But then once he's out of the way of the car he keeps shooting from the side which is just regular murder. https://bsky.app/profile/coreyryung.bsky.social/post/3mbudiwpp7k2d
Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the withdrawal of the United States from 66 international organizations that no longer serve American interests including:
I know they already tried to spin it 'domestic terrorism', but it will be interesting/terrifying to see if the regime gets any blowback at all for shooting a young white woman multiple times in the face for no good reason.
orange and musk already spinning that she was trying to run people over in a stationary vehicle.
Not sure she was aiming at the ICE guy, just trying to get away. Law enforcement in the USA all over the country are trigger happy in situations like this.
If I’m interpreting that correctly he shot her from the side though the driver window not from the front? Ie she was already past him and clearly about to head down the road
According to this thread there was also a bullet hole in the windscreen. It looks like the first shot could arguably be self-defence. The wheels are pointing away from him but maybe he doesn't know that and the law will give him the benefit of the doubt. But then once he's out of the way of the car he keeps shooting from the side which is just regular murder. https://bsky.app/profile/coreyryung.bsky.social/post/3mbudiwpp7k2d
The training being to avoid murdering civilians when the victim is white, presumably?
I find Americans mocking the Brits over policeman having a chat with you over a social media posts somewhat bemusing when they have masked men kidnapping and murdering civilians in the street.
(Not to say I agree with the online safety act etc, but let's put things into perspective).
I know they already tried to spin it 'domestic terrorism', but it will be interesting/terrifying to see if the regime gets any blowback at all for shooting a young white woman multiple times in the face for no good reason.
orange and musk already spinning that she was trying to run people over in a stationary vehicle.
Not sure she was aiming at the ICE guy, just trying to get away. Law enforcement in th e USA all over the country are trigger happy in situations like this.
If I’m interpreting that correctly he shot her from the side though the driver window not from the front? Ie she was already past him and clearly about to head down the road
According to this thread there was also a bullet hole in the windscreen. It looks like the first shot could arguably be self-defence. The wheels are pointing away from him but maybe he doesn't know that and the law will give him the benefit of the doubt. But then once he's out of the way of the car he keeps shooting from the side which is just regular murder. https://bsky.app/profile/coreyryung.bsky.social/post/3mbudiwpp7k2d
If the shooter was in front of the vehicle, a shot that penetrated the windscreen at that point would not hit the driver. The shooter was clearly positioned to the side of the vehicle when they took that shot, as well as all the others.
I’m absolutely astounded that Americans can see an unmarked vehicle with “agents” that don’t identify themselves shoot an American citizen - a mother with stuffed animals inside her car - and just say, “Oh well, she should have just complied.” https://x.com/WesleyLowery/status/2008982839858221385
https://x.com/WesleyLowery/status/2008982839858221385 ...this is the type of shooting that happens a lot...an officer, on foot, trying to stop or detain the driver of a vehicle who is leaving -- resulting in the officer moving in front of the vehicle, becoming afraid they'll get hit or run over and then opening fire..
..for decades, some police departments across the country have banned officers from shooting at moving vehicles. Interestingly, in 2022 AG Merrick Garland updated the DOJ's use of force policy to ban these types of shootings for its officers, too.
I know they already tried to spin it 'domestic terrorism', but it will be interesting/terrifying to see if the regime gets any blowback at all for shooting a young white woman multiple times in the face for no good reason.
orange and musk already spinning that she was trying to run people over in a stationary vehicle.
Not sure she was aiming at the ICE guy, just trying to get away. Law enforcement in th e USA all over the country are trigger happy in situations like this.
If I’m interpreting that correctly he shot her from the side though the driver window not from the front? Ie she was already past him and clearly about to head down the road
According to this thread there was also a bullet hole in the windscreen. It looks like the first shot could arguably be self-defence. The wheels are pointing away from him but maybe he doesn't know that and the law will give him the benefit of the doubt. But then once he's out of the way of the car he keeps shooting from the side which is just regular murder. https://bsky.app/profile/coreyryung.bsky.social/post/3mbudiwpp7k2d
If the shooter was in front of the vehicle, a shot that penetrated the windscreen at that point would not hit the driver. The shooter was clearly positioned to the side of the vehicle when they took that shot, as well as all the others.
(Assuming the photo is real & not AI of course.)
It's consistent with the videos of the incident.
Irrespective of that, what were these agents trying to accomplish anyway - other than illegally intimidate someone quite legally filming their activities ?
The House advances legislation to renew Obamacare subsidies. The procedural vote tees up floor consideration of a clean, three-year subsidy extension later this week.
Trump: "The woman screaming was, obviously, a professional agitator, and the woman driving the car was very disorderly, obstructing and resisting, who then violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer, who seems to have shot her in self defense https://x.com/BlueATLGeorgia/status/2009000228871967225
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
Trump: "The woman screaming was, obviously, a professional agitator, and the woman driving the car was very disorderly, obstructing and resisting, who then violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer, who seems to have shot her in self defense https://x.com/BlueATLGeorgia/status/2009000228871967225
There is nothing - nothing - Joe Biden ever said that was as deluded or detached from reality as this demonstrably false and nonsensical statement from Trump. We can all see he’s lying and/or deranged.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
Shame on you, William. You are an apologist for fascism on this.
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
Black is white. Up is down. War is peace.
This level of blatant lying, which the partisan audience buys into and laughs with, is disgusting and beyond the pale for western democracies isn’t it? I think Berlusconi was better than that. Christ.
But the Russians have a word for it. “Vanyo” I think. Funny that.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't want him banned. Every time he posts something he does yet more damage to his cause. Let him carry on posting and treat him with the scorn he deserves.
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
There is no way that these people and RFK, Hegseth etc will use Ammendment 25 on Trump no matter how bat shit crazy he becomes. They are even madder than the mad king himself.
Shame on the Senators that approved them knowing they are incompetent.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't want him banned. Every time he posts something he does yet more damage to his cause. Let him carry on posting and treat him with the scorn he deserves.
Trump predicted william in 2016.
"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?"
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
Behave you disgusting troll. What is wrong with you man?
I know they already tried to spin it 'domestic terrorism', but it will be interesting/terrifying to see if the regime gets any blowback at all for shooting a young white woman multiple times in the face for no good reason.
orange and musk already spinning that she was trying to run people over in a stationary vehicle.
Not sure she was aiming at the ICE guy, just trying to get away. Law enforcement in the USA all over the country are trigger happy in situations like this.
If I’m interpreting that correctly he shot her from the side though the driver window not from the front? Ie she was already past him and clearly about to head down the road
According to this thread there was also a bullet hole in the windscreen. It looks like the first shot could arguably be self-defence. The wheels are pointing away from him but maybe he doesn't know that and the law will give him the benefit of the doubt. But then once he's out of the way of the car he keeps shooting from the side which is just regular murder. https://bsky.app/profile/coreyryung.bsky.social/post/3mbudiwpp7k2d
That’s what I noted in another response - I counted 3 shots with 1 being marginal (couldn’t tell but possibly from in front) and 2&3 definitely from the side.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't want him banned. Every time he posts something he does yet more damage to his cause. Let him carry on posting and treat him with the scorn he deserves.
Trump predicted william in 2016.
"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?"
In some ways it's the Futurist and Dada Manifesto come to the USA. Maybe the second coming of Mussolini - his cheap theatre and dead boys.
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
Black is white. Up is down. War is peace.
This level of blatant lying, which the partisan audience buys into and laughs with, is disgusting and beyond the pale for western democracies isn’t it? I think Berlusconi was better than that. Christ.
But the Russians have a word for it. “Vanyo” I think. Funny that.
That reminds me - I downloaded a decent copy of "The Nightmare Man" over Christmas.
"The Nightmare Man is a science fiction drama serial transmitted by BBC Television in 1981.[1] The four-part mini-series was adapted for television by Robert Holmes from the 1978 novel Child of Vodyanoi by David Wiltshire.[2][1] It was produced by Ron Craddock (a former producer of Z-Cars) and directed by Douglas Camfield. Both Holmes and Camfield had worked extensively on Doctor Who.
The serial is set on a small Scottish island, where the population is gripped by fear following a series of savage murders and the discovery of a strange craft on the local beach. "
Worth a shot if you are a fan of cheap-but-good UK sci-fi/thriller/espionage stuff.
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
There is no way that these people and RFK, Hegseth etc will use Ammendment 25 on Trump no matter how bat shit crazy he becomes. They are even madder than the mad king himself.
Shame on the Senators that approved them knowing they are incompetent.
Entirely unrelated - and I think I may have recommended it before - but a good Radio 4 series dramatising the Caesars. The episode with David Tennant playing Caligula keeps coming to mind, I won't spoil the dialogue - but there is a very good line where he realises he is mad - and it doesn't matter any more.
"Caesar! is a set of British radio plays set in ancient Rome and written by Mike Walker for the Classic Serial strand. The first series (premiered in 2003) was based on Suetonius's Lives of the Caesars - later series covered later emperors."
Let's also be clear that this isn't some rogue agent. The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
Black is white. Up is down. War is peace.
This level of blatant lying, which the partisan audience buys into and laughs with, is disgusting and beyond the pale for western democracies isn’t it? I think Berlusconi was better than that. Christ.
But the Russians have a word for it. “Vanyo” I think. Funny that.
That reminds me - I downloaded a decent copy of "The Nightmare Man" over Christmas.
"The Nightmare Man is a science fiction drama serial transmitted by BBC Television in 1981.[1] The four-part mini-series was adapted for television by Robert Holmes from the 1978 novel Child of Vodyanoi by David Wiltshire.[2][1] It was produced by Ron Craddock (a former producer of Z-Cars) and directed by Douglas Camfield. Both Holmes and Camfield had worked extensively on Doctor Who.
The serial is set on a small Scottish island, where the population is gripped by fear following a series of savage murders and the discovery of a strange craft on the local beach. "
Worth a shot if you are a fan of cheap-but-good UK sci-fi/thriller/espionage stuff.
It's adapted by Robert Holmes from a book by David Wiltshire. Although 1981, it's reminiscent of Pertwee-era Dr Who: proper seventies moody horror science fiction, with people explaining the plot to each other. Imagine a rogue Cyberman on a killer spree on a small Scottish island, stalked by UNIT. And a good twist at the end.
And there’s the last action of the Ashes, a bit of a waste of a series for England, the one highlight being the terrible pitch in Melbourne producing a win inside two days.
Bipartisan Russian sanctions bill agreed in the US, will target those buying Russian oil with punitive tariffs. Aims to make China and India choose between Russian oil and US exports. There’s already signs that India is making the right choice.
Not at all bonkers. He is planning to fund a Death Star.
Imperial overstretch on steroids. Seems no one in the Trump regime has read "The rise and fall of the great powers". This is going to end in a spectacular bust, and quite possibly much sooner than any one has so far forecast.
Executives of US defense contractors will no longer be allowed to make more than $5 million unless they build "new and modern production plants."
Labour backbenchers will be envious of this kind of approach.
Labour backbenchers, if they don't view private business as fundamentally a criminal enterprise, otherwise view them as an instrument of public policy and a cash cow.
The productive economy is there to have its pockets picked to reward the unproductive economy.
We have a labour business team made up,of people who’ve never run in, or worked in, a business. Just charities, NGOs and the like. Utterly useless.
But this is just letting a Conservative plan play out, isn't it? The previous Chancellor didn't announce plans to keep the reductions going, or leave any slack in the kitty to fund it. Did he?
(A bit like the way that the temporary fuel duty cut was always going to stop next year, every year. See also how quickly the Triple Lock and Winter Fuel Payments went from innovations to Fundamental English Rights that you can find in Magna Carta if you look hard enough. If Rishi's Dishies/Eat Out To Help Out had continued for a bit longer, that would also have become an inalienable thing.)
Conservatives have no right to complain of this being built into the countries budget, as they did it.
You don’t really get this whole free speech thing do you? They have the right to complain about whatever they like
Oh dear, we don't like the policy that we made.
Labour are in charge now of both policy and budgets.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
Not at all bonkers. He is planning to fund a Death Star.
Imperial overstretch on steroids. Seems no one in the Trump regime has read "The rise and fall of the great powers". This is going to end in a spectacular bust, and quite possibly much sooner than any one has so far forecast.
He won't get a cent of that without Congressional agreement.
Though if the Democrats don't win in November, that obvious legal truth might not apoly anymore.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
The bigger problem with that post and his later post is he is taking the ICE/Trump line at face value and attacking those putting out information that disagrees with their narrative ('mayor continues to fan the flames').
Given that the ICE are essentially a private army whose past behaviour suggests they are pure and simple criminals, and Donald Trump is actually a convicted perjurer, forger, liar and tax evader, clearly with serious medical issues, this is not balanced behaviour.
If he were just copying and pasting both sides without comment those attacking him would have far less of a case.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
Trump has been elected by the American people.
I don't like or support him, but I value those who can help me see his appeal from their point of view and the politics of it - I find it helpful for my analysis and betting insights.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
The bigger problem with that post and his later post is he is taking the ICE/Trump line at face value and attacking those putting out information that disagrees with their narrative ('mayor continues to fan the flames').
Given that the ICE are essentially a private army whose past behaviour suggests they are pure and simple criminals, and Donald Trump is actually a convicted perjurer, forger, liar and tax evader, clearly with serious medical issues, this is not balanced behaviour.
If he were just copying and pasting both sides without comment those attacking him would have far less of a case.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
Just be thankful for who isn’t here to try and hijack this discussion.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
The bigger problem with that post and his later post is he is taking the ICE/Trump line at face value and attacking those putting out information that disagrees with their narrative ('mayor continues to fan the flames').
Given that the ICE are essentially a private army whose past behaviour suggests they are pure and simple criminals, and Donald Trump is actually a convicted perjurer, forger, liar and tax evader, clearly with serious medical issues, this is not balanced behaviour.
If he were just copying and pasting both sides without comment those attacking him would have far less of a case.
There's no excuse for personal abuse.
You mean we should avoid statements like 'stoked a climate of hysteria' or stating that ICE officers who shoot passers by are 'doing their jobs?'
It's uncomfortably reminiscent of some of the statements made at the time of George Floyd's murder, and seems essentially to be victim blaming.
At the moment, we don't have the full facts, but such facts as we have do not support what he is saying. For a start, ICE are not 'enforcing immigration laws.' They are snatching people, frequently at random it seems, off the streets, without due process and without responsibility to the courts. Claiming otherwise isn't a great look and does nothing for his credibility.
It is interesting to compare Canada's morale faced with a far more powerful, hostile entity on its border, with the UK's morale upon leaving the EU. It seems to underline to me that our demoralised outlook really has nothing to do with the conditions of Brexit but with the responses of our own administrators, politicians and power structures. Canada seems to have united in response to bullying. Personally I think they've united around the wrong leader, but their resolve is still impressive. The UK has been utterly craven.
It is interesting to compare Canada's morale faced with a far more powerful, hostile entity on its border, with the UK's morale upon leaving the EU. It seems to underline to me that our demoralised outlook really has nothing to do with the conditions of Brexit but with the responses of our own administrators, politicians and power structures. Canada seems to have united in response to bullying. Personally I think they've united around the wrong leader, but their resolve is still impressive. The UK has been utterly craven.
Proof if needed that Ukraine can hit strategic targets in Moscow pretty much at will.
Also proof that the Ukranians are using their missiles on strategic military targets, and not wasting them on residential or public buildings. The two sides in this war are not the same.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
If we ban William having already lost Leon this site's days representing all viewpoints would be over and it may as well be renamed LDbetting
And there’s the last action of the Ashes, a bit of a waste of a series for England, the one highlight being the terrible pitch in Melbourne producing a win inside two days.
Still a better result than the last three Ashes series in Australia for England
And there’s the last action of the Ashes, a bit of a waste of a series for England, the one highlight being the terrible pitch in Melbourne producing a win inside two days.
Still a better result than the last three Ashes series in Australia for England
Well if you’re gonna put it like that!
It is of course true that it’s a better result than in recent history, but it’s still a convincing 4-1 win for the home side.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
If we ban William having already lost Leon this site's days representing all viewpoints would be over and it may as well be renamed LDbetting
There is definitely something of a blind spot on this site when it comes to US politics. Trying to put across the other side frequently results in personal abuse in return. We should be able to debate without the hyperbole that affects many other sites.
To be fair, this also represents the situation in the US itself, where the two sides are extremely polarised, consume totally different media, and often talk straight past each other while misrepresenting the opposing position.
The mid-terms are likely to be a turnout war, both parties are historically unpopular.
Edit: Yes the situation in Minnesota could get worse before it gets better, the population is absolutely furious at the fraud that’s been uncovered.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
The bigger problem with that post and his later post is he is taking the ICE/Trump line at face value and attacking those putting out information that disagrees with their narrative ('mayor continues to fan the flames')..
To be fair to william, the BBC also reported Trump and Noem's statements at face value, bothsidesing the incident, when it's abundantly clear from the videos that both were telling a pack of lies.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
The bigger problem with that post and his later post is he is taking the ICE/Trump line at face value and attacking those putting out information that disagrees with their narrative ('mayor continues to fan the flames').
Given that the ICE are essentially a private army whose past behaviour suggests they are pure and simple criminals, and Donald Trump is actually a convicted perjurer, forger, liar and tax evader, clearly with serious medical issues, this is not balanced behaviour.
If he were just copying and pasting both sides without comment those attacking him would have far less of a case.
There's no excuse for personal abuse.
William, as I've often pointed out, defends Trump's regular abuse of others.
It would be absurd to ban him, though, since he represents the opinion of at least a quarter of the electorate.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
If we ban William having already lost Leon this site's days representing all viewpoints would be over and it may as well be renamed LDbetting
There is definitely something of a blind spot on this site when it comes to US politics. Trying to put across the other side frequently results in personal abuse in return. We should be able to debate without the hyperbole that affects many other sites.
To be fair, this also represents the situation in the US itself, where the two sides are extremely polarised, consume totally different media, and often talk straight past each other while misrepresenting the opposing position.
The mid-terms are likely to be a turnout war, both parties are historically unpopular.
Edit: Yes the situation in Minnesota could get worse before it gets better, the population is absolutely furious at the fraud that’s been uncovered.
Trying to defend what is a blatant murder is a pretty poor show though. You would have to be blind to be taken in.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
If we ban William having already lost Leon this site's days representing all viewpoints would be over and it may as well be renamed LDbetting
You're being a silly billy (again). LD betting? Apart from Casino and yourself, oh and Topping and Max and Bartholomew on the right, and Palmer and owls on the left. And malc, and Taz, both renowned friends of the LibDems... and too many others to mention.
I think the politicians who stoked a climate of hysteria about the federal government enforcing immigration laws and encouraged people to stand in the way of ICE officers doing their jobs need to accept their share of responsibility for what happened.
I wish the mods would ban this bot.
I don't. I value WilliamGlenns alternative viewpoints, even when I don't agree with them.
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
There are a few things here.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
If we ban William having already lost Leon this site's days representing all viewpoints would be over and it may as well be renamed LDbetting
There is definitely something of a blind spot on this site when it comes to US politics. Trying to put across the other side frequently results in personal abuse in return. We should be able to debate without the hyperbole that affects many other sites.
To be fair, this also represents the situation in the US itself, where the two sides are extremely polarised, consume totally different media, and often talk straight past each other while misrepresenting the opposing position.
The mid-terms are likely to be a turnout war, both parties are historically unpopular.
Edit: Yes the situation in Minnesota could get worse before it gets better, the population is absolutely furious at the fraud that’s been uncovered.
Trying to defend what is a blatant murder is a pretty poor show though. You would have to be blind to be taken in.
Personally I try and avoid commenting on incidents such as we saw yesterday. Far too many times has the video been carefully edited to show one particular point of view, or we see only the beginning or the end of a larger incident, with the full video showing a different story once the media has moved on.
I'm a former defense attorney and currently a civil liberties attorney with no political dog in this fight. I watched the video at least 10 times from different angles and at different speeds and waited to offer an opinion, which I still reserve the right to change if additional information changes the calculus.
It is very clear that the officers instigated the confrontation. The woman initially tried to wave them past her.
ICE officers have no authority to search a US citizen or arrest her (unless there's probable cause to believe she's harboring undocumented individuals, not a contention here). A woman surrounded by masked, armed men who have no law enforcement authority over her has every right to try to escape. Video shows her steering wheel is turned to the right, clearly an attempt to leave WITHOUT hitting anyone and steer clear of the officer standing towards the front of her car. That officer had time to step to the side, which is where he was when he shot her.
Even a real police officer would not have the right to shoot at her for trying to flee. This is well-established in the case law; deadly force may not be used simply to prevent someone from getting away. Given that the ICE officers had no law enforcement authority to begin with, AND the video footage shows she was trying to escape a perceived threat, not to kill anyone, the crime is all the more inexcusable.
I'm praying for the victim's family, especially her children. I'm also praying for all the conservatives who are so unprincipled and lost they're excusing this terrible crime, and gloating over a death that will leave three young children motherless, because of the victim's politics.
Comments
So that puts up business rates in the area.
Why do you think that so little has been done about them? The taxman gets a pile. The council sees a joint rent being paid…
Really makes me feel,old, all these people I grew up either watching or,listening to are dying.
So question is what is the portfolio composition / how many stocks etc.
But I’m uncomfortable with members of congress playing the market
https://x.com/emeriticus/status/2008973223401279661
https://x.com/RepDonBacon/status/2009000189173092373?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
Commercial landlords are keeping rents high, landlord of our local shopping centre is happy for most units to be empty. They'll offer an initial discounted period but then up it to a level that makes the business unsustainable. AIUI it's to maintain the pretence that all the units could be let at the high rate rather than admit the centre is overvalued
“Is football playing
Along the river shore,
With lads to chase the leather,
Now I stand up no more?”
Ay the ball is flying,
The lads play heart and soul;
The goal stands up, the keeper
Stands up to keep the goal."
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/51782/is-my-team-ploughing
Independence was recognised in 1783.
Why should the government object to money laundering as long as they get their cut?
Why should local authorities object to interesting, innovative shop-fronts opening in their town centres?
Why should anyone else care?
It has been established since (from memory) the late 2010s that the error from British opinion polls is not derivable from the sample size, because of the self-selection and weighting elements. This is why the BPC insist that BPC member polls publish their estimate of the expected error. That change came in some time in the last ten years.
For example, this YouGov poll contains this text.
"...All polls are subject to a wide range of potential sources of error. On the basis of the historical record of the polls at recent general elections, there is a 9 in 10 chance that the true value of a party’s support lies within 4 points of the estimates provided by this poll, and a 2 in 3 chance that they lie within 2 points..."
In situations like this there is no mathematical justification for extracting a subsample from the whole and calling it valid. It's the polling equivalent of "zoom and enhance"
Appreciate you're the expert on this kind of thing so happy to defer. I'd be happy to look at a sub-sample to get a rough idea of where voters of coming from or to, for example.
The other big on is holding rents high, rather than crystallising devaluations which would put loans against commercial properties into question. Despite much the property being empty at those rents.
https://x.com/mayorfrey/status/2009010043778437322
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0mx99ple17o.amp
The extent of collusion (active or passive) by authorities is unclear.
BREAKING: The Trump administration plans to put money raised from seizure of Venezuelan oil into bank accounts *outside* the U.S. Treasury -- they told lawmakers today per multiple sources familiar.
Sources said they understood these as similar or decidedly "off-shore" accounts.
Asking the WH for clarification.
https://bsky.app/profile/coreyryung.bsky.social/post/3mbudiwpp7k2d
https://x.com/whitehouse/status/2009025328065466665
Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the withdrawal of the United States from 66 international organizations that no longer serve American interests including:
🔴35-non UN organizations
🔴31 UN entities
This seems significant: not a FORMER DHS official, but a SENIOR (current) one saying the officer who fired acted counter to training.
This is not an admin that admits mistakes. And they are hanging this guy out to dry on Day One.
I think they know this is bad. Really bad.
https://bsky.app/profile/johnpfaff.bsky.social/post/3mbugdkools2w
I find Americans mocking the Brits over policeman having a chat with you over a social media posts somewhat bemusing when they have masked men kidnapping and murdering civilians in the street.
(Not to say I agree with the online safety act etc, but let's put things into perspective).
Kemi looked confident and assured at PMQ's today while SKS looked like a total, droaning, blustering moron.
Get. Him. Out.
which looks like this:
If the shooter was in front of the vehicle, a shot that penetrated the windscreen at that point would not hit the driver. The shooter was clearly positioned to the side of the vehicle when they took that shot, as well as all the others.
(Assuming the photo is real & not AI of course.)
https://x.com/WesleyLowery/status/2008982839858221385
...this is the type of shooting that happens a lot...an officer, on foot, trying to stop or detain the driver of a vehicle who is leaving -- resulting in the officer moving in front of the vehicle, becoming afraid they'll get hit or run over and then opening fire..
..for decades, some police departments across the country have banned officers from shooting at moving vehicles. Interestingly, in 2022 AG Merrick Garland updated the DOJ's use of force policy to ban these types of shootings for its officers, too.
Irrespective of that, what were these agents trying to accomplish anyway - other than illegally intimidate someone quite legally filming their activities ?
https://x.com/SpencerHakimian/status/2008692407546892626
Scum.
The House advances legislation to renew Obamacare subsidies. The procedural vote tees up floor consideration of a clean, three-year subsidy extension later this week.
https://x.com/annmarie/status/2009038156197236883?s=20
https://x.com/BlueATLGeorgia/status/2009000228871967225
There is nothing - nothing - Joe Biden ever said that was as deluded or detached from reality as this demonstrably false and nonsensical statement from Trump. We can all see he’s lying and/or deranged.
https://x.com/mehdirhasan/status/2009006638272008320?s=20
-ICE's jurisdiction is ONLY on matters related to immigration.
-They do NOT have normal police powers or authorities.
-To stop a vehicle they MUST have reasonable cause to believe it contains an undocumented immigrant.
-To draw their weapon on someone they MUST have reasonable cause that their lives are in *DIRECT* danger.
-They CANNOT detain you with out reasonable cause to believe you are undocumented.
-They CANNOT detain a US citizen for passing-by the area.
Ice had NO jurisdiction to stop or interact with this woman at all, never mind pull out a gun.
https://x.com/adamscochran/status/2009019654866645104
The administration, from Trump down, are defending this action as they blatantly lie about it.
Noem on Minnesota: It was an act of domestic terrorism. I.C.E. Officers got stuck in the snow. They were attempting to push out their vehicle, and a woman attacked them, and those surrounding them, and attempted to run them over.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/2008966132095754639
You are an apologist for fascism on this.
Christ.
I am angry and it’s not even my country. If I lived there….
You are an apologist for murderers and kidnappers and you should be ashamed.
The US is looking more and more like Venezuela every day.
But the Russians have a word for it. “Vanyo” I think. Funny that.
Shame on the Senators that approved them knowing they are incompetent.
"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nightmare_Man_(TV_series)
"The Nightmare Man is a science fiction drama serial transmitted by BBC Television in 1981.[1] The four-part mini-series was adapted for television by Robert Holmes from the 1978 novel Child of Vodyanoi by David Wiltshire.[2][1] It was produced by Ron Craddock (a former producer of Z-Cars) and directed by Douglas Camfield. Both Holmes and Camfield had worked extensively on Doctor Who.
The serial is set on a small Scottish island, where the population is gripped by fear following a series of savage murders and the discovery of a strange craft on the local beach. "
Worth a shot if you are a fan of cheap-but-good UK sci-fi/thriller/espionage stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar!
"Caesar! is a set of British radio plays set in ancient Rome and written by Mike Walker for the Classic Serial strand. The first series (premiered in 2003) was based on Suetonius's Lives of the Caesars - later series covered later emperors."
https://m.ok.ru/video/7128226925252
https://m.ok.ru/video/7128309369540
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbldZn582hopLzpi7eRseOD8pB_jFxPDP
It's adapted by Robert Holmes from a book by David Wiltshire. Although 1981, it's reminiscent of Pertwee-era Dr Who: proper seventies moody horror science fiction, with people explaining the plot to each other. Imagine a rogue Cyberman on a killer spree on a small Scottish island, stalked by UNIT. And a good twist at the end.
https://x.com/joshrogin/status/2009053390010241363
https://x.com/lindseygrahamsc/status/2009037587416027479
"International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law;"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/01/07/japanese-nuclear-worker-loses-phone-top-secret-data/ (£££)
What's Japanese for “Oh, FFS!”?
It's disappointing that a post personally abusing him for this got so many likes overnight. And I don't think that's to this site's credit.
Good afternoon from a smoggy Shanghai airport, where I am eating Japanese food and thus contributing to the healing of this rift.
Though if the Democrats don't win in November, that obvious legal truth might not apoly anymore.
William regularly cheerleads a president whose rhetoric is constantly suffused with both personal and general abuse.
People are understandably angry when he seeks to justify what looks very like murder by a member of the largest and least trained coercive federal agency in history.
I agree with those who say william should not be banned.
But I am not going to pretend that he is not defending what is rapidly descending into fascism.
Given that the ICE are essentially a private army whose past behaviour suggests they are pure and simple criminals, and Donald Trump is actually a convicted perjurer, forger, liar and tax evader, clearly with serious medical issues, this is not balanced behaviour.
If he were just copying and pasting both sides without comment those attacking him would have far less of a case.
I don't like or support him, but I value those who can help me see his appeal from their point of view and the politics of it - I find it helpful for my analysis and betting insights.
It's uncomfortably reminiscent of some of the statements made at the time of George Floyd's murder, and seems essentially to be victim blaming.
At the moment, we don't have the full facts, but such facts as we have do not support what he is saying. For a start, ICE are not 'enforcing immigration laws.' They are snatching people, frequently at random it seems, off the streets, without due process and without responsibility to the courts. Claiming otherwise isn't a great look and does nothing for his credibility.
https://x.com/tendar/status/2009144272147370229
Proof if needed that Ukraine can hit strategic targets in Moscow pretty much at will.
Also proof that the Ukranians are using their missiles on strategic military targets, and not wasting them on residential or public buildings. The two sides in this war are not the same.
It is of course true that it’s a better result than in recent history, but it’s still a convincing 4-1 win for the home side.
To be fair, this also represents the situation in the US itself, where the two sides are extremely polarised, consume totally different media, and often talk straight past each other while misrepresenting the opposing position.
The mid-terms are likely to be a turnout war, both parties are historically unpopular.
Edit: Yes the situation in Minnesota could get worse before it gets better, the population is absolutely furious at the fraud that’s been uncovered.
It would be absurd to ban him, though, since he represents the opinion of at least a quarter of the electorate.
I'm a former defense attorney and currently a civil liberties attorney with no political dog in this fight. I watched the video at least 10 times from different angles and at different speeds and waited to offer an opinion, which I still reserve the right to change if additional information changes the calculus.
It is very clear that the officers instigated the confrontation. The woman initially tried to wave them past her.
ICE officers have no authority to search a US citizen or arrest her (unless there's probable cause to believe she's harboring undocumented individuals, not a contention here). A woman surrounded by masked, armed men who have no law enforcement authority over her has every right to try to escape. Video shows her steering wheel is turned to the right, clearly an attempt to leave WITHOUT hitting anyone and steer clear of the officer standing towards the front of her car. That officer had time to step to the side, which is where he was when he shot her.
Even a real police officer would not have the right to shoot at her for trying to flee. This is well-established in the case law; deadly force may not be used simply to prevent someone from getting away. Given that the ICE officers had no law enforcement authority to begin with, AND the video footage shows she was trying to escape a perceived threat, not to kill anyone, the crime is all the more inexcusable.
I'm praying for the victim's family, especially her children. I'm also praying for all the conservatives who are so unprincipled and lost they're excusing this terrible crime, and gloating over a death that will leave three young children motherless, because of the victim's politics.
https://x.com/JeninYounesEsq/status/2009096021008163003?s=20