Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
The Cass Review was published in April 2024. How the hell can this only be happening now? How many children, mainly autistic children, have been damaged over the last 22 months? Cass said that there was no evidence of any benefit from these medications. That should have been the end of it.
There isn't any good evidence of benefit, nor for that matter of harm. There simply is no quality evidence at all.
The whole point of the study is to look for that evidence of benefit and/or harm.
It is simply unethical not to do the trial.
What about the evidence from the children who were treated by GIDS at the Tavistock? Shouldn't that be available? I seem to recall that some of the adult clinics refused to co-operate with Cass. Why?
And isn't there evidence from other countries?
For my part I do not understand how a troubled child aged 10 or even older could possibly give informed consent to a process that leads to loss of fertility and possibly also sexual function. Can a parent really give that consent on their behalf and shouldn't their motives be interrogated eg are they doing so because of homophobia, for instance? That concern was raised by some of the Tavistock therapists. Maybe all this has been addressed by the ethics committee. But the greatest care should be taken precisely because of the irreversible nature of the interventions. Once puberty is blocked at the age it is meant to happen, there is no second chance even if the child changes their mind.
The epidemic of complaints and litigation anticipated by the press after Tavistock closed never materialised.
Indeed in the 10 years after the Tavistock closed there were only eight complaints, most of those about delayed access to care:
There are ethical issues over consent in every trial, and particularly so in trials on children, but these are not unique to drugs used in gender discrepencies. There are also ethical issues of denying care that may well be of benefit, and of making the only way to access care through a trial.
Cass did not condemn the treatment of gender misaligned, but it did demand better evidence. The whole point of the study is to get that evidence of benefit and harm. One of the outcomes is to look at how reversible these effects are. There isn't much evidence on that topic either.
Anyway I'm off to bed. I had a nasty fall earlier when collecting wood and have really hurt my ribs. I'm hoping it's only bruising and nothing worse but for the moment it hurts if I move and breathe. This is not the best weekend for Husband to disappear to an archaeology conference.
Take care Cyclefree. Is there anyone else around to help ?
Nope. And the Berlingo's battery is playing silly buggers. So I can't go out. So it's me, the cats and my library books.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
As well as seeing tarriffs of a way of punishing naughty countries who won't do his bidding, he sees them as a cist-free way of raising money for America which foreigners will pay. Possibly there was a time his understanding was more detailed and that actions had consequences such as e.g. higher prices and retaliations. But if he did know, he's forgotten.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Going back to what Taz asked hours ago, I think maybe biggest outcome from Supreme Courts Tariff decision is perhaps not the politics, but how is compensation now going to be paid? This is America, someone injured you or your finances, and court has ruled against them, what they done to you is illegal, you now sue for compensation.
I think it was RCS who pointed us to where billboards all down side of US highways, for Saul Goodman lawyers and for politicians all exactly the same: I’m a fighter, I’m a winner, I will fight and win for you, hire me.
So where Trumps Tarrifs hurt Americans, hurt business small and huge, US government will be asked to pay compensation, US government will have to pay compensation?
You guys will know better than me how this works in America, can Trump himself be sued directly for this illegal policy, like French politicians jailed for their policy decisions on contaminated blood?
Just so we’re clear… Howard Lutnik is the *architect* of Trump’s tariff plan. He’s the one who pushed Trump on these.
And at the EXACT SAME TIME that he was doing this, Lutnik’s sons **who he appointed to take over his bank** were betting the tariffs would be struck down and buying up refund rights at $0.25 on the dollar.
And now the government owes companies refunds… and depending on how many refund slips they are holding, the Lutnik’s bank could make BILLIONS of dollars.
Anyway I'm off to bed. I had a nasty fall earlier when collecting wood and have really hurt my ribs. I'm hoping it's only bruising and nothing worse but for the moment it hurts if I move and breathe. This is not the best weekend for Husband to disappear to an archaeology conference.
Take care Cyclefree. Is there anyone else around to help ?
Nope. And the Berlingo's battery is playing silly buggers. So I can't go out. So it's me, the cats and my library books.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
As well as seeing tarriffs of a way of punishing naughty countries who won't do his bidding, he sees them as a cist-free way of raising money for America which foreigners will pay. Possibly there was a time his understanding was more detailed and that actions had consequences such as e.g. higher prices and retaliations. But if he did know, he's forgotten.
This is one thing that can't be blamed on his dementia.
The only consistent thing he has ever believed in, other than himself, is tariffs.
He opposed deals like NAFTA designed to cut them and advocated heavily for them from the 80s at least onwards, quite consistently.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
As well as seeing tarriffs of a way of punishing naughty countries who won't do his bidding, he sees them as a cist-free way of raising money for America which foreigners will pay. Possibly there was a time his understanding was more detailed and that actions had consequences such as e.g. higher prices and retaliations. But if he did know, he's forgotten.
This is one thing that can't be blamed on his dementia.
The only consistent thing he has ever believed in, other than himself, is tariffs.
He opposed deals like NAFTA designed to cut them and advocated heavily for them from the 80s at least onwards, quite consistently.
Fair enough. I am convinced however that he doesn't really understand them, much as he may believe in them.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
As well as seeing tarriffs of a way of punishing naughty countries who won't do his bidding, he sees them as a cist-free way of raising money for America which foreigners will pay. Possibly there was a time his understanding was more detailed and that actions had consequences such as e.g. higher prices and retaliations. But if he did know, he's forgotten.
This is one thing that can't be blamed on his dementia.
The only consistent thing he has ever believed in, other than himself, is tariffs.
He opposed deals like NAFTA designed to cut them and advocated heavily for them from the 80s at least onwards, quite consistently.
Did we, at our general ages, ever think we would see America fall apart in real time? We know powers fall but this is surely the been the most brutal and swift suicide in the history of power.
Anyway I'm off to bed. I had a nasty fall earlier when collecting wood and have really hurt my ribs. I'm hoping it's only bruising and nothing worse but for the moment it hurts if I move and breathe. This is not the best weekend for Husband to disappear to an archaeology conference.
Take care Cyclefree. Is there anyone else around to help ?
Nope. And the Berlingo's battery is playing silly buggers. So I can't go out. So it's me, the cats and my library books.
Call for help if you need it. Please don't be a stoic.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
As well as seeing tarriffs of a way of punishing naughty countries who won't do his bidding, he sees them as a cist-free way of raising money for America which foreigners will pay. Possibly there was a time his understanding was more detailed and that actions had consequences such as e.g. higher prices and retaliations. But if he did know, he's forgotten.
This is one thing that can't be blamed on his dementia.
The only consistent thing he has ever believed in, other than himself, is tariffs.
He opposed deals like NAFTA designed to cut them and advocated heavily for them from the 80s at least onwards, quite consistently.
Did we, at our general ages, ever think we would see America fall apart in real time? We know powers fall but this is surely the been the most brutal and swift suicide in the history of power.
Worse is they voted for him again even after the January ordeal in the Capitol 4 years earlier.
Preserving democracy wasn't as important as pwning the Libs.
Neal Katyal: "I was able to go to court -- the son of immigrants -- and say on behalf of American small businesses, 'Hey, this president is acting illegally.' I was able to present my case, have them ask really hard questions, and at the end of it they voted and we won. That is something extraordinary about this country."
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
As well as seeing tarriffs of a way of punishing naughty countries who won't do his bidding, he sees them as a cist-free way of raising money for America which foreigners will pay. Possibly there was a time his understanding was more detailed and that actions had consequences such as e.g. higher prices and retaliations. But if he did know, he's forgotten.
This is one thing that can't be blamed on his dementia.
The only consistent thing he has ever believed in, other than himself, is tariffs.
He opposed deals like NAFTA designed to cut them and advocated heavily for them from the 80s at least onwards, quite consistently.
Did we, at our general ages, ever think we would see America fall apart in real time? We know powers fall but this is surely the been the most brutal and swift suicide in the history of power.
I saw one comment, apparently possibly paraphrasing Fukuyama, that in a sense America seems to be throwing away many of its strengths and advantages which gave rise to stability and prosperity out of a kind of boredom and inherent desire for struggle.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
As well as seeing tarriffs of a way of punishing naughty countries who won't do his bidding, he sees them as a cist-free way of raising money for America which foreigners will pay. Possibly there was a time his understanding was more detailed and that actions had consequences such as e.g. higher prices and retaliations. But if he did know, he's forgotten.
This is one thing that can't be blamed on his dementia.
The only consistent thing he has ever believed in, other than himself, is tariffs.
He opposed deals like NAFTA designed to cut them and advocated heavily for them from the 80s at least onwards, quite consistently.
Fair enough. I am convinced however that he doesn't really understand them, much as he may believe in them.
In that, at least, he is far from alone and aligned with many of us common people in strength of belief not being correlated with understanding. He just does so in a particularly egotistical and destructive way, with dire consequences rippling out widely.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
So that's it. Unless they 25th or impeach and convict, it's over.
Even effing Gorsuch now gets it.
“Our system of separated powers and checks-and-balances threatens to give way to the continual and permanent accretion of power in the hands of one man. That is no recipe for a republic.” —Justice Neil Gorsuch https://x.com/RitchieTorres/status/2024890370182484221
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
How cute, you believe in the US Constitution.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court gave a psychopath blanket immunity to do as he pleases, even if its illegal. Whoopsiedaisy.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
With all due respect, the Executive Branch has repeatedly ignored the Judicial Branch as regards deportation orders and ICE. What happens if Trump says the Supreme Court is wrong, and we're simply going keep the tariffs?
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
And I would highly recommend avoiding anyone who doesn't like tea.
I don't like tea and I like pineapple on pizza and please don't ban me.
How can you not like tea? That strong savoury morning hit. The continuation each morning of empire. Waking up and your drinks allow you to be balanced rather than those continentals with theor manic coffee hit. An Englishman starts with tea, invades the world and is suitably diffident about it. Napoleon drank morning coffee - didn’t work for him.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
You sound like HYUFD. Laws have as much inherent value as a £50 note - next to nothing. Unless someone enforces the SCOTUS decision it's worthless.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
Presumably the worst case here is that rather than some ordered new regime based on the ruling Trump carries on insistng hhe wont agree and importers just refuse to pay the tax, sorry tariff, as it is now illegal to charge them. Then individual customs officers have to decide whether to physically let an item in on that basis?
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
You sound like HYUFD. Laws have as much inherent value as a £50 note - next to nothing. Unless someone enforces the SCOTUS decision it's worthless.
Congress have been affirmed to have the power to impose tariffs not the President, though as the GOP have a majority in Congress they likely stay for now
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
So that's it. Unless they 25th or impeach and convict, it's over.
Even effing Gorsuch now gets it.
“Our system of separated powers and checks-and-balances threatens to give way to the continual and permanent accretion of power in the hands of one man. That is no recipe for a republic.” —Justice Neil Gorsuch https://x.com/RitchieTorres/status/2024890370182484221
... Having helped enable it.
Pretending they haven't enabled it is the way they justify it to themselves. By not being a puppet 100% of the time, they ignore where they sold out their principles about the powers (and untouchability) of the presidency.
Also Gorsuch: For those who think it important for the Nation to impose more tariffs, I understand that today’s decision will be disappointing. All I can offer them is that most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people (including the duty to pay taxes and tariffs) are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people’s elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man.
There, deliberation tempers impulse, and compromise hammers disagreements into workable solutions. And because laws must earn such broad support to survive the legislative process, they tend to endure, allowing ordinary people to plan their lives in ways they cannot when the rules shift from day to day. In all, the legislative process helps ensure each of us has a stake in the laws that govern us and in the Nation’s future.
For some today, the weight of those virtues is apparent. For others, it may not seem so obvious. But if history is any guide, the tables will turn and the day will come when those disappointed by today’s result will appreciate the legislative process for the bulwark of liberty it is.
Obviously legal issues become complex, even the Trump immunity decision probably was, but such a clear statement of lofty principle is hard to square with their general approach to decision-making.
It reads like a plea to Congress to get off its arse and stop palming everything off to the Court.
They won’t defeat us. They can come and take our iPads and PB logins from our cold dead hands.
One reason I'm holding off on buying an iPhone 17 is I'm worried the ios keyboard will make posting here (and elsewhere) next to impossible. Stick with android for now even though this battery is probably going to explode in my face at some point.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
With all due respect, the Executive Branch has repeatedly ignored the Judicial Branch as regards deportation orders and ICE. What happens if Trump says the Supreme Court is wrong, and we're simply going keep the tariffs?
Trump has said that the Supreme Court majority is under foreign influence. So even if anyone does pluck up enough courage to do the bare minimum and assert that the Supreme Court is the final authority on what the President can legally do, then all Trump is going to do is say "China got to them" or some similar nonsense. The US is completely screwed.
I no longer think that there's a peaceful way out of the mess they have gotten into.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
You sound like HYUFD. Laws have as much inherent value as a £50 note - next to nothing. Unless someone enforces the SCOTUS decision it's worthless.
Congress have been affirmed to have the power to impose tariffs not the President, though as the GOP have a majority in Congress they likely stay for now
I affirm that I can run a 16-minute 5K and deadlift 250kg.
Just seen Royal Mail trying to cut Sat deliveries for non 1st class post. Meanwhile my postman confirmed there were no deliveries on my round on one day this week Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled and if a round doesn't happen its cheaper to.pay the fine than deliver the post.
Something is v wrong if this is true
If you can't be bothered to pay for a first class stamp why should you expect to see your letter or parcel delivered on a Saturday?
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
How cute, you believe in the US Constitution.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court gave a psychopath blanket immunity to do as he pleases, even if its illegal. Whoopsiedaisy.
I never said I believed in it . Thats just what it says . If Trump ignores it then it will be a constitutional crisis .
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
With all due respect, the Executive Branch has repeatedly ignored the Judicial Branch as regards deportation orders and ICE. What happens if Trump says the Supreme Court is wrong, and we're simply going keep the tariffs?
How do they collect illegal tariffs? Who is going to pay them?
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
You sound like HYUFD. Laws have as much inherent value as a £50 note - next to nothing. Unless someone enforces the SCOTUS decision it's worthless.
John Marshall Roberts has made his decision; now let him enforce it!
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
As others have noted more directly, his government has outright ignored decisions from lower courts, including Federal courts.
Ignoring SCOTUS is more significant, but would not be as big a shift from current actions as it should be.
They won’t defeat us. They can come and take our iPads and PB logins from our cold dead hands.
One reason I'm holding off on buying an iPhone 17 is I'm worried the ios keyboard will make posting here (and elsewhere) next to impossible. Stick with android for now even though this battery is probably going to explode in my face at some point.
True, you post on here on an iPad and it’s utter nonsense - I’m trying to post really sensible stuff and iPad changes it.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
And I would highly recommend avoiding anyone who doesn't like tea.
I don't like tea and I like pineapple on pizza and please don't ban me.
How can you not like tea? That strong savoury morning hit. The continuation each morning of empire. Waking up and your drinks allow you to be balanced rather than those continentals with theor manic coffee hit. An Englishman starts with tea, invades the world and is suitably diffident about it. Napoleon drank morning coffee - didn’t work for him.
TEA.
Can't stand the smell of tea. Have to leave the room.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
Just like tea. Don't make them drink it.
And unconscious people don't want tea and can't answer the question, because they're unconscious.
And I would highly recommend avoiding anyone who doesn't like tea.
I don't like tea and I like pineapple on pizza and please don't ban me.
How can you not like tea? That strong savoury morning hit. The continuation each morning of empire. Waking up and your drinks allow you to be balanced rather than those continentals with theor manic coffee hit. An Englishman starts with tea, invades the world and is suitably diffident about it. Napoleon drank morning coffee - didn’t work for him.
TEA.
Can't stand the smell of tea. Have to leave the room.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
How cute, you believe in the US Constitution.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court gave a psychopath blanket immunity to do as he pleases, even if its illegal. Whoopsiedaisy.
I never said I believed in it . Thats just what it says . If Trump ignores it then it will be a constitutional crisis .
Should be. Even if there was impeachment (again) there would never be enough Senators willing to convict.
So the any crisis would still be there in the realm of a probably peeved off Supreme Court, but the practical impact might not be immediate.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
A demented couple in a care home, previously happily married for 50 years.
(As it happens the law takes the no exceptions whatsoever view aiui so splits them up, which to me seems deeply sad).
Anyway I'm off to bed. I had a nasty fall earlier when collecting wood and have really hurt my ribs. I'm hoping it's only bruising and nothing worse but for the moment it hurts if I move and breathe. This is not the best weekend for Husband to disappear to an archaeology conference.
Take care Cyclefree. Is there anyone else around to help ?
Nope. And the Berlingo's battery is playing silly buggers. So I can't go out. So it's me, the cats and my library books.
Had a relative do similar. From stool to bathtub edge and then hospital for 4 days. He suffered through the night but had to go in anyway, 6 ribs were the toll for late night shower curtain fixing.
Though you probably sick of them please consider a hospital trip
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
A demented couple in a care home, previously happily married for 50 years.
My understanding is that legally the care staff have a duty of care to try to at least attempt to prevent that couple from engaging in coitus as legally consent can't be given.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Just seen Royal Mail trying to cut Sat deliveries for non 1st class post. Meanwhile my postman confirmed there were no deliveries on my round on one day this week Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled and if a round doesn't happen its cheaper to.pay the fine than deliver the post.
Something is v wrong if this is true
If you can't be bothered to pay for a first class stamp why should you expect to see your letter or parcel delivered on a Saturday?
I normally use 1st class stamps but letters posted in this neck of the woods usually take about a week to be delivered.
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
A demented couple in a care home, previously happily married for 50 years.
My understanding is that legally the care staff have a duty of care to try to at least attempt to prevent that couple from engaging in coitus as legally consent can't be given.
That's my understanding too. Which may or may not be right depending on how far gone they are, imo. Clearly if they're so gaga they have no idea what's going on or are distressed or whatever then that can't be allowed, but I think there are definite shades of grey.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
With all due respect, the Executive Branch has repeatedly ignored the Judicial Branch as regards deportation orders and ICE. What happens if Trump says the Supreme Court is wrong, and we're simply going keep the tariffs?
Trump has said that the Supreme Court majority is under foreign influence. So even if anyone does pluck up enough courage to do the bare minimum and assert that the Supreme Court is the final authority on what the President can legally do, then all Trump is going to do is say "China got to them" or some similar nonsense. The US is completely screwed.
I no longer think that there's a peaceful way out of the mess they have gotten into.
They've already decided it is illegitimate if they lose an election, breaking a taboo about accepting results. And the public decided that was perfectly fine, and elected Trump back in.
They have also been pushing at the ideas that the government has to obey court orders, and that there are any limits at all on presidential authority.
That is still being tested, and we can hope the nation rejects it. Because whilst imminent predictions about america becoming an authoritarian state basket case might well be overblown, it's also not an absurdity to see it as a risk precisely because it is not just Trump who is trying this stuff, he is just the focus.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
So that's it. Unless they 25th or impeach and convict, it's over.
Even effing Gorsuch now gets it.
“Our system of separated powers and checks-and-balances threatens to give way to the continual and permanent accretion of power in the hands of one man. That is no recipe for a republic.” —Justice Neil Gorsuch https://x.com/RitchieTorres/status/2024890370182484221
... Having helped enable it.
Pretending they haven't enabled it is the way they justify it to themselves. By not being a puppet 100% of the time, they ignore where they sold out their principles about the powers (and untouchability) of the presidency.
Also Gorsuch: For those who think it important for the Nation to impose more tariffs, I understand that today’s decision will be disappointing. All I can offer them is that most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people (including the duty to pay taxes and tariffs) are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people’s elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man.
There, deliberation tempers impulse, and compromise hammers disagreements into workable solutions. And because laws must earn such broad support to survive the legislative process, they tend to endure, allowing ordinary people to plan their lives in ways they cannot when the rules shift from day to day. In all, the legislative process helps ensure each of us has a stake in the laws that govern us and in the Nation’s future.
For some today, the weight of those virtues is apparent. For others, it may not seem so obvious. But if history is any guide, the tables will turn and the day will come when those disappointed by today’s result will appreciate the legislative process for the bulwark of liberty it is.
Obviously legal issues become complex, even the Trump immunity decision probably was, but such a clear statement of lofty principle is hard to square with their general approach to decision-making.
It reads like a plea to Congress to get off its arse and stop palming everything off to the Court.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
How cute, you believe in the US Constitution.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court gave a psychopath blanket immunity to do as he pleases, even if its illegal. Whoopsiedaisy.
I never said I believed in it . Thats just what it says . If Trump ignores it then it will be a constitutional crisis .
Should be. Even if there was impeachment (again) there would never be enough Senators willing to convict.
So the any crisis would still be there in the realm of a probably peeved off Supreme Court, but the practical impact might not be immediate.
It would have been better if the court had issued clarity about what happens next . This is now left to the International Trade Court .
They can’t ignore the SCOTUS so even if you ended up with a panel of 3 judges more sympathetic to Trump compared to when they last ruled against him there is no further debate on the legality of the tariffs . That’s settled, they can only deal with how to implement the decision .
The Cass Review was published in April 2024. How the hell can this only be happening now? How many children, mainly autistic children, have been damaged over the last 22 months? Cass said that there was no evidence of any benefit from these medications. That should have been the end of it.
There isn't any good evidence of benefit, nor for that matter of harm. There simply is no quality evidence at all.
The whole point of the study is to look for that evidence of benefit and/or harm.
It is simply unethical not to do the trial.
What about the evidence from the children who were treated by GIDS at the Tavistock? Shouldn't that be available? I seem to recall that some of the adult clinics refused to co-operate with Cass. Why?
And isn't there evidence from other countries?
For my part I do not understand how a troubled child aged 10 or even older could possibly give informed consent to a process that leads to loss of fertility and possibly also sexual function. Can a parent really give that consent on their behalf and shouldn't their motives be interrogated eg are they doing so because of homophobia, for instance? That concern was raised by some of the Tavistock therapists. Maybe all this has been addressed by the ethics committee. But the greatest care should be taken precisely because of the irreversible nature of the interventions. Once puberty is blocked at the age it is meant to happen, there is no second chance even if the child changes their mind.
The reasons why the clinics did not provide info are multiple and a bit Yes Minister, and all of the following are true
* There was a reluctance to hand over data to preserve the participants * The trans people themselves mounted a word-of-mouth campaign to refuse permission for their data to be handed over * Data Protection issues * It is difficult to track down trans people if they don't want to be found. Given that they can and do change combinations of their sex, name, NHS number, GP, address and job, this should be obvious
This makes what should be a straightforward data linkage problem insuperably difficult. The bald Saj had a good go of it and even changed the law to make it legal but was defeated by the fact that in a non-registration country you can't make people give you their details if they don't want to. And given the lack of trust between the trans community (insofar as there is one) and the health services, which will now only be worsened by this postponement, this is difficult to fix.
Just seen Royal Mail trying to cut Sat deliveries for non 1st class post. Meanwhile my postman confirmed there were no deliveries on my round on one day this week Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled and if a round doesn't happen its cheaper to.pay the fine than deliver the post.
Something is v wrong if this is true
If you can't be bothered to pay for a first class stamp why should you expect to see your letter or parcel delivered on a Saturday?
I normally use 1st class stamps but letters posted in this neck of the woods usually take about a week to be delivered.
So still can be delivered within the week on a Saturday then if sent first class
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
It could not be clearer to Congress that they need to impeach and convict Trump and remove him from office. The President has a clear constitutional duty to enforce the law, which means immediately rescinding tariffs that the Supreme Court has ruled are unconstitutional.
There's no wriggle room or interpretation possible there.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
It could not be clearer to Congress that they need to impeach and convict Trump and remove him from office. The President has a clear constitutional duty to enforce the law, which means immediately rescinding tariffs that the Supreme Court has ruled are unconstitutional.
There's no wriggle room or interpretation possible there.
Technically the SC actually said whether the tariffs stand is a matter for Congress, so if Congress vote to keep them they stand
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
It could not be clearer to Congress that they need to impeach and convict Trump and remove him from office. The President has a clear constitutional duty to enforce the law, which means immediately rescinding tariffs that the Supreme Court has ruled are unconstitutional.
There's no wriggle room or interpretation possible there.
The Congress of Shame will be how the history books record this period me thinks.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
It could not be clearer to Congress that they need to impeach and convict Trump and remove him from office. The President has a clear constitutional duty to enforce the law, which means immediately rescinding tariffs that the Supreme Court has ruled are unconstitutional.
There's no wriggle room or interpretation possible there.
Technically the SC actually said whether the tariffs stand is a matter for Congress, so if Congress vote to keep them they stand
But they are supposed to not be in place until that happens.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
It could not be clearer to Congress that they need to impeach and convict Trump and remove him from office. The President has a clear constitutional duty to enforce the law, which means immediately rescinding tariffs that the Supreme Court has ruled are unconstitutional.
There's no wriggle room or interpretation possible there.
Technically the SC actually said whether the tariffs stand is a matter for Congress, so if Congress vote to keep them they stand
And as the tariffs were dreamed up in a moment when Trump’s drugs weren’t working and make no sense at all while damaging America’s economy, they will be rescinded because Congress is full of intelligent and honourable people who will do what the law demands not what a fat old paedo asks them to…ah, hang on…
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
Presumably the worst case here is that rather than some ordered new regime based on the ruling Trump carries on insistng hhe wont agree and importers just refuse to pay the tax, sorry tariff, as it is now illegal to charge them. Then individual customs officers have to decide whether to physically let an item in on that basis?
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
It could not be clearer to Congress that they need to impeach and convict Trump and remove him from office. The President has a clear constitutional duty to enforce the law, which means immediately rescinding tariffs that the Supreme Court has ruled are unconstitutional.
There's no wriggle room or interpretation possible there.
Not the way it works, unfortunately.
They ruled that this action was unlawful. So they've taken another action which has not gone before the Court, that resets the legal process.
As I understand it this new action has a 150 day limit though, which is part of the reason why it was never used in the first place. So question becomes what happens when the 150 days is up? If Congress has by then voted to implement such tariffs, it addresses the concerns that Gorsuch et al wrote about.
If they keep these in place in clear violation of the 150 day limit, then expect it rapidly to end up back before the Courts.
Just so we’re clear… Howard Lutnik is the *architect* of Trump’s tariff plan. He’s the one who pushed Trump on these.
And at the EXACT SAME TIME that he was doing this, Lutnik’s sons **who he appointed to take over his bank** were betting the tariffs would be struck down and buying up refund rights at $0.25 on the dollar.
And now the government owes companies refunds… and depending on how many refund slips they are holding, the Lutnik’s bank could make BILLIONS of dollars.
The last major poll on whether Trump should obey SCOTUS decisions was conducted last October.
84% of those polled said yes .
Even if you allow for the further radicalisation of some GOP voters !
Let’s knock off around 10% then if Trump ignores the ruling things could unravel quickly as that’s still an overwhelming majority for him to obey the court.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
It could not be clearer to Congress that they need to impeach and convict Trump and remove him from office. The President has a clear constitutional duty to enforce the law, which means immediately rescinding tariffs that the Supreme Court has ruled are unconstitutional.
There's no wriggle room or interpretation possible there.
Not the way it works, unfortunately.
They ruled that this action was unlawful. So they've taken another action which has not gone before the Court, that resets the legal process.
As I understand it this new action has a 150 day limit though, which is part of the reason why it was never used in the first place. So question becomes what happens when the 150 days is up? If Congress has by then voted to implement such tariffs, it addresses the concerns that Gorsuch et al wrote about.
If they keep these in place in clear violation of the 150 day limit, then expect it rapidly to end up back before the Courts.
It might be a blatant workaround which may or may not be doomed to failure too - but the law often allows such tactics.
Anyway I'm off to bed. I had a nasty fall earlier when collecting wood and have really hurt my ribs. I'm hoping it's only bruising and nothing worse but for the moment it hurts if I move and breathe. This is not the best weekend for Husband to disappear to an archaeology conference.
Ouch! Hope it eases off overnight. Don't be afraid to go to A&E if it doesn't.
Neal Katyal: "I was able to go to court -- the son of immigrants -- and say on behalf of American small businesses, 'Hey, this president is acting illegally.' I was able to present my case, have them ask really hard questions, and at the end of it they voted and we won. That is something extraordinary about this country."
The Cass Review was published in April 2024. How the hell can this only be happening now? How many children, mainly autistic children, have been damaged over the last 22 months? Cass said that there was no evidence of any benefit from these medications. That should have been the end of it.
There isn't any good evidence of benefit, nor for that matter of harm. There simply is no quality evidence at all.
The whole point of the study is to look for that evidence of benefit and/or harm.
It is simply unethical not to do the trial.
What about the evidence from the children who were treated by GIDS at the Tavistock? Shouldn't that be available? I seem to recall that some of the adult clinics refused to co-operate with Cass. Why?
And isn't there evidence from other countries?
For my part I do not understand how a troubled child aged 10 or even older could possibly give informed consent to a process that leads to loss of fertility and possibly also sexual function. Can a parent really give that consent on their behalf and shouldn't their motives be interrogated eg are they doing so because of homophobia, for instance? That concern was raised by some of the Tavistock therapists. Maybe all this has been addressed by the ethics committee. But the greatest care should be taken precisely because of the irreversible nature of the interventions. Once puberty is blocked at the age it is meant to happen, there is no second chance even if the child changes their mind.
The reasons why the clinics did not provide info are multiple and a bit Yes Minister, and all of the following are true
* There was a reluctance to hand over data to preserve the participants * The trans people themselves mounted a word-of-mouth campaign to refuse permission for their data to be handed over * Data Protection issues * It is difficult to track down trans people if they don't want to be found. Given that they can and do change combinations of their sex, name, NHS number, GP, address and job, this should be obvious
This makes what should be a straightforward data linkage problem insuperably difficult. The bald Saj had a good go of it and even changed the law to make it legal but was defeated by the fact that in a non-registration country you can't make people give you their details if they don't want to. And given the lack of trust between the trans community (insofar as there is one) and the health services, which will now only be worsened by this postponement, this is difficult to fix.
I appreciate you having done the research. It adds value. Ta.
Just seen Royal Mail trying to cut Sat deliveries for non 1st class post. Meanwhile my postman confirmed there were no deliveries on my round on one day this week Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled and if a round doesn't happen its cheaper to.pay the fine than deliver the post.
Something is v wrong if this is true
If you can't be bothered to pay for a first class stamp why should you expect to see your letter or parcel delivered on a Saturday?
I normally use 1st class stamps but letters posted in this neck of the woods usually take about a week to be delivered.
So still can be delivered within the week on a Saturday then if sent first class
"Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled"
And yet millions of young people are sat on the sofa without work or education.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
But with Trump's mug on a banner outside the Department of Justice, dare you ignore a Presidential Executive Order that does contradict a SCOTUS decision?
If you do, you have lost your job, and the DOJ is coming for you and your family.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
But with Trump's mug on a banner outside the Department of Justice, dare you ignore a Presidential Executive Order that does contradict a SCOTUS decision?
If you do, you have lost your job, and the DOJ is coming for you and your family.
You might get away with it if the Dow drops below 50k, as per recent DoJ policy.
Anyway I'm off to bed. I had a nasty fall earlier when collecting wood and have really hurt my ribs. I'm hoping it's only bruising and nothing worse but for the moment it hurts if I move and breathe. This is not the best weekend for Husband to disappear to an archaeology conference.
Ouch! Hope it eases off overnight. Don't be afraid to go to A&E if it doesn't.
Cyclefree has no working car, so it would either be ambulance or neighbour, I think.
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
You sound like HYUFD. Laws have as much inherent value as a £50 note - next to nothing. Unless someone enforces the SCOTUS decision it's worthless.
Exactly so. And where does the responsibility to enforce the law lie in the US constitution? With the President and the Executive branch...
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
You sound like HYUFD. Laws have as much inherent value as a £50 note - next to nothing. Unless someone enforces the SCOTUS decision it's worthless.
Congress have been affirmed to have the power to impose tariffs not the President, though as the GOP have a majority in Congress they likely stay for now
I affirm that I can run a 16-minute 5K and deadlift 250kg.
Just seen Royal Mail trying to cut Sat deliveries for non 1st class post. Meanwhile my postman confirmed there were no deliveries on my round on one day this week Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled and if a round doesn't happen its cheaper to.pay the fine than deliver the post.
Something is v wrong if this is true
If you can't be bothered to pay for a first class stamp why should you expect to see your letter or parcel delivered on a Saturday?
I normally use 1st class stamps but letters posted in this neck of the woods usually take about a week to be delivered.
So still can be delivered within the week on a Saturday then if sent first class
"Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled"
And yet millions of young people are sat on the sofa without work or education.
Exactly, you don't need a single GCSE to walk up a driveway and deliver a letter or parcel
The man is a senile loon who cares only about his ego, and nothing about policy other than through that lens.
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
Trump can say what he likes . Any tariffs that are in operation that relied on IEEPA legislation are now invalid . He’s clearly deranged and doesn’t understand the law .
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
With all due respect, the Executive Branch has repeatedly ignored the Judicial Branch as regards deportation orders and ICE. What happens if Trump says the Supreme Court is wrong, and we're simply going keep the tariffs?
How do they collect illegal tariffs? Who is going to pay them?
If the goods you want to sell are held in port until you pay, what are you going to do? Watch your business collapse on a point of principle, or pay up?
The Cass Review was published in April 2024. How the hell can this only be happening now? How many children, mainly autistic children, have been damaged over the last 22 months? Cass said that there was no evidence of any benefit from these medications. That should have been the end of it.
There isn't any good evidence of benefit, nor for that matter of harm. There simply is no quality evidence at all.
The whole point of the study is to look for that evidence of benefit and/or harm.
It is simply unethical not to do the trial.
What about the evidence from the children who were treated by GIDS at the Tavistock? Shouldn't that be available? I seem to recall that some of the adult clinics refused to co-operate with Cass. Why?
And isn't there evidence from other countries?
For my part I do not understand how a troubled child aged 10 or even older could possibly give informed consent to a process that leads to loss of fertility and possibly also sexual function. Can a parent really give that consent on their behalf and shouldn't their motives be interrogated eg are they doing so because of homophobia, for instance? That concern was raised by some of the Tavistock therapists. Maybe all this has been addressed by the ethics committee. But the greatest care should be taken precisely because of the irreversible nature of the interventions. Once puberty is blocked at the age it is meant to happen, there is no second chance even if the child changes their mind.
The reasons why the clinics did not provide info are multiple and a bit Yes Minister, and all of the following are true
* There was a reluctance to hand over data to preserve the participants * The trans people themselves mounted a word-of-mouth campaign to refuse permission for their data to be handed over * Data Protection issues * It is difficult to track down trans people if they don't want to be found. Given that they can and do change combinations of their sex, name, NHS number, GP, address and job, this should be obvious
This makes what should be a straightforward data linkage problem insuperably difficult. The bald Saj had a good go of it and even changed the law to make it legal but was defeated by the fact that in a non-registration country you can't make people give you their details if they don't want to. And given the lack of trust between the trans community (insofar as there is one) and the health services, which will now only be worsened by this postponement, this is difficult to fix.
I appreciate you having done the research. It adds value. Ta.
Please don't take me as an authority on these things. The above are my memories of matters that were discussed on here (or Reddit/Mumsnet/Ovarit/etc) at the time when these things were happening. The measures by Sajid Javid (then health secretary?) for data linkage were discussed here and IIRC predated Cass (didn't he set up Cass in the first place?).
Just seen Royal Mail trying to cut Sat deliveries for non 1st class post. Meanwhile my postman confirmed there were no deliveries on my round on one day this week Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled and if a round doesn't happen its cheaper to.pay the fine than deliver the post.
Something is v wrong if this is true
If you can't be bothered to pay for a first class stamp why should you expect to see your letter or parcel delivered on a Saturday?
I normally use 1st class stamps but letters posted in this neck of the woods usually take about a week to be delivered.
So still can be delivered within the week on a Saturday then if sent first class
"Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled"
And yet millions of young people are sat on the sofa without work or education.
Exactly, you don't need a single GCSE to walk up a driveway and deliver a letter or parcel
Was anything like this happening before the internet?
Note the ages of the accused: 28 - 73.
Given that the site used by Mr Pelicot was up for 6 years before the French authorities closed it down and that before that trial they found 70,000 men in chat rooms sharing information on how to drug their wives and recruit men to rape them, no-one with any sense could possibly have thought this was unusual. Drugged/sleeping women is a whole porn category.
Quite why so many men want to have sex (I am using that term very loosely) with an inert body baffles me. Surely a w**k is more enjoyable than quasi-necrophilia?
And to answer your question, yes, men have used drugs or alcohol to get women insensible or comatose before raping them. Though probably not on the scale we are now seeing.
Gisele Pelicot has found love again. Remarkable that she is able to trust a man after what happened to her. Her Newsnight interview is well worth watching. Shame must indeed change sides.
Can I, as a man, put my head above the parapet and say that I totally agree with you. For me sex is a two-way experience of enjoyment. Or at least ought to be!
Agreed. But more basic than that.
If consent is not or cannot be given then it is rape. Plain and simple. I can conceive of no situations or exceptions where this is not the case.
A demented couple in a care home, previously happily married for 50 years.
(As it happens the law takes the no exceptions whatsoever view aiui so splits them up, which to me seems deeply sad).
Within that 50 years there will have been instances when the husband wanted sex and the wife did not (and vice versa). If the husband forced himself on the wife that would be rape. Once they are in the home and she can no longer give consent then the same rule applies.
That said, as a separate issue, I agree it is sad that they are split up.
Just seen Royal Mail trying to cut Sat deliveries for non 1st class post. Meanwhile my postman confirmed there were no deliveries on my round on one day this week Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled and if a round doesn't happen its cheaper to.pay the fine than deliver the post.
Something is v wrong if this is true
If you can't be bothered to pay for a first class stamp why should you expect to see your letter or parcel delivered on a Saturday?
I normally use 1st class stamps but letters posted in this neck of the woods usually take about a week to be delivered.
So still can be delivered within the week on a Saturday then if sent first class
"Horsham has 18 vacancies that cannot be filled"
And yet millions of young people are sat on the sofa without work or education.
I’ve noted before that recruitment seems to be broken -
- employers complain of not getting candidates, hundreds of fake CVs, people who do turn up seem to be extremely low quality. I’ve seen this, when trying to recruit. And not for small money. - Candidates complain of fake job adverts, sending hundreds of applications, no replies.
Comments
The projection is 33 seats for Plaid, 32 Reform, 20 Labour, 6 Conservatives, 3 Lib Dems, 2 Greens.
Smart
"Effective immediately, all national security tariffs remain fully in place and in full force and effect. Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."
He's decided to just ignore the Supreme Court ruling.
https://x.com/Daractenus/status/2024919338168259013
So I would not want you to say that you object to coffee and that I would like your tea if only I tried it.
Indeed in the 10 years after the Tavistock closed there were only eight complaints, most of those about delayed access to care:
https://www.thepinknews.com/2026/02/11/nhs-closed-tavistock-over-trans-care-concerns-there-were-just-eight-complaints/
There are ethical issues over consent in every trial, and particularly so in trials on children, but these are not unique to drugs used in gender discrepencies. There are also ethical issues of denying care that may well be of benefit, and of making the only way to access care through a trial.
Cass did not condemn the treatment of gender misaligned, but it did demand better evidence. The whole point of the study is to get that evidence of benefit and harm. One of the outcomes is to look at how reversible these effects are. There isn't much evidence on that topic either.
I think it was RCS who pointed us to where billboards all down side of US highways, for Saul Goodman lawyers and for politicians all exactly the same: I’m a fighter, I’m a winner, I will fight and win for you, hire me.
So where Trumps Tarrifs hurt Americans, hurt business small and huge, US government will be asked to pay compensation, US government will have to pay compensation?
You guys will know better than me how this works in America, can Trump himself be sued directly for this illegal policy, like French politicians jailed for their policy decisions on contaminated blood?
Just so we’re clear… Howard Lutnik is the *architect* of Trump’s tariff plan. He’s the one who pushed Trump on these.
And at the EXACT SAME TIME that he was doing this, Lutnik’s sons **who he appointed to take over his bank** were betting the tariffs would be struck down and buying up refund rights at $0.25 on the dollar.
And now the government owes companies refunds… and depending on how many refund slips they are holding, the Lutnik’s bank could make BILLIONS of dollars.
There’s nothing else I can say about this that won’t catch me a permaban
https://x.com/Villgecrazylady/status/2024891488539165000
The only consistent thing he has ever believed in, other than himself, is tariffs.
He opposed deals like NAFTA designed to cut them and advocated heavily for them from the 80s at least onwards, quite consistently.
Trump: “I can do anything I want to do to them… I’m allowed to destroy the country.”
Let’s be clear.
No president is “allowed” to unilaterally destroy any other country.
If this isn’t impeachment-worthy, nothing is.
https://x.com/allenanalysis/status/2024925093437358550
A senile megalomaniac with the powers of the US presidency is extraordinarily dangerous.
Which is why the 25th amendment exists.
Please don't be a stoic.
Preserving democracy wasn't as important as pwning the Libs.
@atrupar
Neal Katyal: "I was able to go to court -- the son of immigrants -- and say on behalf of American small businesses, 'Hey, this president is acting illegally.' I was able to present my case, have them ask really hard questions, and at the end of it they voted and we won. That is something extraordinary about this country."
"We have a system that self-corrects"
https://x.com/atrupar/status/2024955825916162140
===
Yep. And you are about to throw it away unless the midterms are a rout for Dems.
@RosieDuffield1
Big breaking news incoming about the PB Trial 🍿 (Don't want to break any journalist's scoops!).
https://x.com/RosieDuffield1/status/2024935926854504725
===
Do we know about this guys?
“Our system of separated powers and checks-and-balances threatens to give way to the continual and permanent accretion of power in the hands of one man. That is no recipe for a republic.” —Justice Neil Gorsuch
https://x.com/RitchieTorres/status/2024890370182484221
... Having helped enable it.
Under the US Constitution you can’t ignore a SCOTUS decision.
If the Republicans aren't heavily defeated in the midterms, then the US (and the world) will be in a very bad place indeed.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court gave a psychopath blanket immunity to do as he pleases, even if its illegal. Whoopsiedaisy.
TEA.
Also Gorsuch:
For those who think it important for the Nation to impose more tariffs, I understand that today’s decision will be disappointing. All I can offer them is that most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people (including the duty to pay taxes and tariffs) are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people’s elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man.
There, deliberation tempers impulse, and compromise hammers disagreements into workable solutions. And because laws must earn such broad support to survive the legislative process, they tend to endure, allowing ordinary people to plan their lives in ways they cannot when the rules shift from day to day. In all, the legislative process helps ensure each of us has a stake in the laws that govern us and in the Nation’s future.
For some today, the weight of those virtues is apparent. For others, it may not seem so obvious. But if
history is any guide, the tables will turn and the day will come when those disappointed by today’s result will appreciate the legislative process for the bulwark of liberty it is.
Obviously legal issues become complex, even the Trump immunity decision probably was, but such a clear statement of lofty principle is hard to square with their general approach to decision-making.
It reads like a plea to Congress to get off its arse and stop palming everything off to the Court.
I no longer think that there's a peaceful way out of the mess they have gotten into.
Ignoring SCOTUS is more significant, but would not be as big a shift from current actions as it should be.
So the any crisis would still be there in the realm of a probably peeved off Supreme Court, but the practical impact might not be immediate.
(As it happens the law takes the no exceptions whatsoever view aiui so splits them up, which to me seems deeply sad).
Though you probably sick of them please consider a hospital trip
They have also been pushing at the ideas that the government has to obey court orders, and that there are any limits at all on presidential authority.
That is still being tested, and we can hope the nation rejects it. Because whilst imminent predictions about america becoming an authoritarian state basket case might well be overblown, it's also not an absurdity to see it as a risk precisely because it is not just Trump who is trying this stuff, he is just the focus.
@LabourNorthWest
·
1h
We’ve run out! Getting more of these printed in Gorton and Denton due to popular demand
https://x.com/LabourNorthWest/status/2024956593385644521
They can’t ignore the SCOTUS so even if you ended up with a panel of 3 judges more sympathetic to Trump compared to when they last ruled against him there is no further debate on the legality of the tariffs . That’s settled, they can only deal with how to implement the decision .
* There was a reluctance to hand over data to preserve the participants
* The trans people themselves mounted a word-of-mouth campaign to refuse permission for their data to be handed over
* Data Protection issues
* It is difficult to track down trans people if they don't want to be found. Given that they can and do change combinations of their sex, name, NHS number, GP, address and job, this should be obvious
This makes what should be a straightforward data linkage problem insuperably difficult. The bald Saj had a good go of it and even changed the law to make it legal but was defeated by the fact that in a non-registration country you can't make people give you their details if they don't want to. And given the lack of trust between the trans community (insofar as there is one) and the health services, which will now only be worsened by this postponement, this is difficult to fix.
There's no wriggle room or interpretation possible there.
They are disappearing down the plughole.
They ruled that this action was unlawful. So they've taken another action which has not gone before the Court, that resets the legal process.
As I understand it this new action has a 150 day limit though, which is part of the reason why it was never used in the first place. So question becomes what happens when the 150 days is up? If Congress has by then voted to implement such tariffs, it addresses the concerns that Gorsuch et al wrote about.
If they keep these in place in clear violation of the 150 day limit, then expect it rapidly to end up back before the Courts.
84% of those polled said yes .
Even if you allow for the further radicalisation of some GOP voters !
Let’s knock off around 10% then if Trump ignores the ruling things could unravel quickly as that’s still an overwhelming majority for him to obey the court.
And yet millions of young people are sat on the sofa without work or education.
If you do, you have lost your job, and the DOJ is coming for you and your family.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=arsenal+tv#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:131daa1c,vid:5A2KR1FKkXs,st:0
Before the USA started turning into a Banana Republic it would be upto the DOJ to enforce court decisions not ignore them .
The rule of law is only as good as the enforcement behind it . If that goes then it’s effectively over for the USA as a functioning democracy.
The spineless GOP are handmaidens to that .
We’ll see what happens once this ends up at the International Trade Court which will make a decision re refunds etc .
So nothing undemocratic or illegal about that
That said, as a separate issue, I agree it is sad that they are split up.
The mid terms if they actually happen complicate things . The Dems have done a good job in framing them as a tax on consumers.
- employers complain of not getting candidates, hundreds of fake CVs, people who do turn up seem to be extremely low quality. I’ve seen this, when trying to recruit. And not for small money.
- Candidates complain of fake job adverts, sending hundreds of applications, no replies.