candide

If I dare interfere... why should he do that? Aren't you able to do it by yourself instead of having other posters lose their time for meeting your information needs? It seems to be a noticeable trend in this thread.

Right! The broader conspiration may be a bit complex to prove. The Georgia case is more obvious.

He probably had a financial interest in it! However, he forgot that Trump often doesn't pay his suppliers! ???? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/14/trump-refusing-to-pay-rudy-giuliani-legal-fees-after-falling-out On top of it, as he is under trial for defamation, he cannot even retaliate against Trump! To acknowledge Trump was lying would aggravate his case! ????

Right! Let's not forget the other part of the population which is held as hostage by Brexiters.

Trump’s Truth Social Is Banning Users Who Post About Jan. 6 Hearings, According to Reports "The irony is rich: Truth Social, Donald Trump’s Twitter copycat claiming it is “free from political discrimination,” has reportedly banned users who posted information from Thursday’s congressional hearing on the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol — in which the former president is a key focus." https://news.yahoo.com/trump-truth-social-banning-users-164736257.html MAGA has become a symbol of freedom of expression! ????

One of the main argument for Brexit has been that the "new" global UK would be able to strike significant deals which would not have been possible for the EU to make (because of EU bureaucracy, etc...) So what did UK achieve in terms of trade deals which has not been made already (or close to completion ) by the EU? And if any, how significant?

You are right. The UK has succeeded in mimicking nearly all EU trade deals it had access to before Brexit. However which are the significant trade deals which the EU doesn't have? Where are the promised game changing deals triggered by UK's new "freedom"?

Your post absolutely confirms you are watching Fox News and Tucker ???? https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/mar/02/donald-trump/no-proof-trump-requested-10000-guard-troops-jan-6-/ On top of it, as Lacessit's post shows, Trump even tried to prevent calling troops! Actually, it was Pence who ultimately called troops https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2022/06/10/pence-not-trump-asked-guard-troops-to-help-defend-capitol-on-jan-6-panel-says/

So, if I understand well, he just postponed dealing with this critical issue: - if he doesn't use article 16, he lets the EU infringe on UK's sovereignty (according to posters in this thread), so not so clever - if he uses article 16, what would be the consequences? Would they show he has been clever?

Thanks!

This menu is from July 2021. Does it that they used to sell for medical purpose only (prescriptions?), and now are allowed to sell to anyone?

I know the law has just been voted but practically, has anyone been able to legally buy good weed (I.e. flowers) and got high with it?

You would be more convincing if you would apply to yourself the concern for precision you are advocating. The Russia investigation was not a conspiracy, several facts have been established and several of Trumps allies for his campaign convicted. Contrary to what you claim the recent "evidence" did not show who the "real culprits" are. The IG found that the investigation was properly predicated, and Durham's investigation failed to provide evidence contradicting it. He only found evidence of Clinton's campaign leaking dubious information (the Alfa server data) to the press. Wow! A politician leaking dubious information against opponents to the press! Sussman's trial also confirmed that the Alfa server information has not been used by the FIB.

Brexiters in general, for example in this forum.

That was the decision made. Then Brexiters should stop whining about border checks, the EU being not nice etc... They have their nose in it and it's their own fault.

If it's that bad, why did BoJo sign an agreement allowing it? That would be a case of acute negligence...

It left it with Brexit. If I remember well, Brexiters did not want to remain in the common market because they did not want to be supervised by the European Court of Justice.

Why would they make an exception for UK? They are applying the usual EU regulation. Ontop of it, t is forbidden by the WTO. It's the UK who did not want to join the common market for ideological reasons, and made the choice to be a third country. You cannot have your cake and eat it. BTW the reason why UK is accepting EU checks is that UK is unable to do border checks. The new information system is still not operational. That's also against WTO rules.

According to ONS statistics, EU citizen had a higher employment rate than other categories. It means that, in terms of taxes and various contributions, they were contributing more than the other categories. So they were actually subsidising benefits for the other categories, UK citizen included. The category with the lowest rate of employment (and hence the most subsidised) was that of non-EU foreigners, whose number is not affected by Brexit. https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/ukandnonukpeopleinthelabourmarket/february2020

Not clearly at all Uk sovereignty: the EU is applying the agreement negotiated. If it is true that there us a breach of sovereignty, it means It's BoJo who breached it by signing the agreement Good faith: the EU is applying the same checks as to any third-party country without any discrimination, in accordance to TWO rules

You are distorting what is explained in this article. Are you sure you have read it all? The (unsubstantiated) statement was not about all border checks, it was about SPS checks (sanitary) and about a particular type of check (document checks, which are actually electronic transactions) Quote: "Mr McMahon’s statement does not say that 20% of all EU checks take place in the Irish Sea. He says that, based on a calculation, 20% of documentary SPS checks take place in NI – i.e. that one fifth of a certain subcategory of a certain type of check take place here. When asked to provide details of how this calculation was made, a DAERA spokesperson said: “The AERA Committee was advised that from Jan-March 2021, evidence received from the EU TRACES database indicated that the volume of checks for products of animal origin at NI POE constituted approx 20% of the EU total.” Moreover, the EC did not confirm this percentage "From our SPS statistics (TRACES system), we can see that Rotterdam performs 33% of physical checks on food products of animal origin, while Belfast only performs 2% and Larne 1.5%. From this point of view, official controls at Rotterdam are definitely more numerous, and more in line with the minimum frequency rates for physical checks laid down in EU legislation." On top of it, the 0.5% population argument is moot as a significant share of goods checked are not for the NI market and are ultimately going to Eire. In brief, it is unsubstantiated, and concerns only SPS checks, and among SPS checks, only documentary checks (which, as the EC explains in the article, are electronic transactions)

Too late

You and me have absolutely no power to change anything. It's all about commenting and discussing.

That's the Brexiters' duty to find solutions to the problems they created, not mine.

It would require more than doubling electricity production capacity, either nuclear or gas (welcome Russia), at the same time in all European countries, install charging devices everywhere, and being able to avoid chaos during main holiday travel peaks. I am not sure it is realistic... 13 years is a very short-term for infrastructure issues.