candide

Useful advices here! How to Drain a Swamp First, dig a trench. https://slate.com/technology/2016/10/how-to-drain-a-swamp.html

They did not completely get it wrong, as it is what is shown in the report (see the graph in my previous post). They just did not notice that in was calculated in the model with constant price level, in order to neutralise the effect of inflation.. So 33b in constant price is broadly equivalent to 100b at current price level.

Lol. What a loss of face for him! ????

From the CER report cited in the Independent, the 33 billion figure is not cumulative (unlike your Covid figure), From what I understand, in it also in constant 2009 prices. https://www.cer.eu/insights/cost-brexit-june-2022

BBC News - Russian troops able to freeze sperm for free - lawyer https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64107729 ????

A liar, a cheat, a crook, and probably a traitor. A dignified MAGA rep. ????

B.S.! It's not about believing MSM, etc... It's about believing scientifically validated data and analyses.

An interesting analysis of the relative level of inaction about Brexit in the political sphere. Britain weathered political turmoil in 2022. But Brexit remains the elephant in the room Analysis by Luke McGee, CNN https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/27/europe/brexit-2023-intl-analysis-cmd-gbr/index.html

So being global has nothing to do with globalisation? Kind of contortionist? "the act or process of globalizing : the state of being globalized especially : the development of an increasingly integrated global economy marked especially by free trade, free flow of capital, and the tapping of cheaper foreign labor markets" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/globalization

Me stupid! I thought "global Britain" was a key theme of Brexitism! ???? https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/inflection-points/boris-johnson-transforms-global-britain-slogan-into-an-inspiring-strategic-plan/

Which % in London, which voted against Brexit?

If you are so eager to know, then why don't you start by reading scientific publications about it? A large amount of data is already available, and has been investigated. Some links have been already provided in this thread. Here's a meta-analysis of the different studies. It also references most of the scientific studies made so far. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/2/e050278 As mentioned by Bkk Brian, it takes long time to do a serious scientific investigation, such as the one I linked, and to have a Grand Jury making this assessment instead of scientists is a joke.

Do you think this issue has not been investigated by scientists? That a politically motivated show will bring up any new reliable knowledge about it?

The most stupid are probably the ones who voted for her.

It was obvious to anyone with a brain. However, Brexit is an act of faith and no rational argument may matter.

It's a lie. It has already been pointed out to you, and you knowingly repeat the same lie. Posting it over and over will not make it true. The report doesn't ommit this fact. Posting on his social media site, Trump called the report “highly partisan” and falsely claimed it didn’t include his statement on January 6 that his supporters should protest “peacefully and patriotically.” The committee did include that statement, though, and noted that he followed that comment with election falsehoods and charged language exhorting the crowd to “fight like hell.” https://www.euronews.com/2022/12/23/house-committee-report-says-donald-trump-lit-the-fire-of-capitol-riots

Well, the good side of it is that, if it didn't happen, we would have missed this! ???? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/24/josh-hawley-republican-senator-ran-running-capitol-attack-kansas-city-star

A good highlight of key points in the report Jan. 6 report says Trump floated plan for 10,000 troops to protect him - recap of findings https://news.yahoo.com/jan-6-committees-final-report-134753140.html In particular: "Two days before the Jan. 6 assault, then-President Donald Trump persisted in his desire to accompany demonstrators on a march to the Capitol, suggesting that 10,000 National Guard troops could provide protection for him and an entourage. According to the committee, White House Senior Advisor Max Miller “shot it down immediately” out of concern for Trump’s safety, indicating that there was no additional conversation about the National Guard protection plan. “Just glad we killed the national guard and a procession,” Miller later texted to Trump aide Katrina Pierson. The episode stands out, as there is no evidence that Trump ever called on the National Guard to put down the eventual riot at the Capitol, contributing to the long-delayed military response to the violent assault"

Lol! The GOP report! While it is true that Trump evoked sending national guards to the protest, he never made a formal request (testimony linked in my post to which you never replied). Moreover, according to the Miller, it was to protect protesters, not the Capitol (linked in Heybruce's post to which you did not reply). As concerns Pelosi, she is not in charge of the Capitol police (links in a previous post, idem). She has a vague supervision role, and McConnell has exactly the same role on an equal level (strange, only Pelosi is mentioned by the right-wing). Pelosi never turned down any request for national guards. There is no proof of it, including in the linked article. It seems you are keen to ignore facts brought to you when they don't fit your propaganda narrative.

Which facts?

Your "news" is from August 2021.

Trump is lying about it (see links in my post)

He's also lying about that: Posting on his social media site, Trump called the report “highly partisan” and falsely claimed it didn’t include his statement on January 6 that his supporters should protest “peacefully and patriotically.” The committee did include that statement, though, and noted that he followed that comment with election falsehoods and charged language exhorting the crowd to “fight like hell.” https://www.euronews.com/2022/12/23/house-committee-report-says-donald-trump-lit-the-fire-of-capitol-riots If you want to see key facts ommitted, read the GOP report, not the committee report.

And as usual: lies. Trump did not sign an order to deploy 20,000 troops on Jan. 6 https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-trump-order-national-guard-156055113284 Trump did not have 10,000 troops ready to deploy on Jan. 6, his defense secretary says https://www.cbsnews.com/news/january-6-trump-did-not-have-10000-national-guard-troops-ready/#app Fact check: Trump repeats false claim that Pelosi rejected request for National Guard ahead of Jan. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/12/16/fact-check-no-trump-request-10000-guard-troops-jan-6/8929215002/ Fact check: Nancy Pelosi wasn't ‘in charge’ of Capitol Police on Jan. 6 https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/07/27/fact-check-nancy-pelosi-isnt-in-charge-capitol-police/8082088002/

Spot on!