Chomper Higgot

Doomed, doomed, we’re all doomed.

It’s a concept of a plan, details aren’t necessary, they only confuse his rubes.

The choices people make are being controlled by corporate marketing. Oh I know, you don’t respond to marketing, you’re a ‘free thinker’.

From first link: “In response, the Ministry of Justice points out eligibility for the scheme is based on the offence, not the offender, and that offenders may be released early from their sentence for a lesser offence when they have previously completed a sentence for a sexual or violent offence.” Your second link is behind a paywall, so I went looking for an alternative, which reveals Lawson Natty has not been released and is awaiting deportation, refer link below: https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/gordon-gault-killer-lawson-nattys-29874083.amp Your third link: The Republica failed to mention some salient points. Fortunately The Daily Mail provides the important missing details: “A prisoner was arrested on suspicion of rape moments after being set free under Sir Keir Starmer's early release scheme, MailOnline can reveal.” “The man was seen walking out of the gates of the jail before turning his head from side to side in astonishment as he realised police were waiting for him. He allowed himself to be cuffed and led away into a waiting van that took him to a nearby police station. “ “Following an enquiry to the Met, it has emerged the man, 28, was arrested on suspicion of rape, sex assault and a racially aggravated public order offence - raising the question of why he was ever lined up for early release in the first place. “ “It is unclear when the alleged rape took place.” It seems like someone forgot to charge this guy with crimes he committed before he was sent to Prison, which probably explains why those crimes were not considered in his release. Thanks for the links.

Links please.

Living wages for 40hrs work is a better idea.

I want to hear more from Labour on restricting the advertising and sale of the processed foods, drugs and alcohol that are the root cause of so much of the nations ill health.

I’ve not once missed paying income taxes since I started work - not once.

They’ve got their hands full teaching some spelling.

I think I’ll skip reading the OP.

“However, this policy excludes those convicted of sexual offenses,terrorism, domestic abuse, or serious violent crimes.”

I’ll admit no such thing. They’ve been in Government 2 months, they’ve been in Government 2 months, barely any policies are started, let alone put into full effect. I suggest you try to get over the news of July 5.

They blocked two impeachments too. Look how that’s working out for them.

I don’t eat bugs. And nobody is forcing me or anyone else to eat bugs. Why you chose to swallow the bug conspiracy is what needs an explanation.

And parents buy junk food as a direct result of marketing of junk food.

Nobody is being forced to eat bugs. Is there any conspiracy nonsense you won’t swallow?

Crackpot conspiracy is rather weirdly attractive to Tump’s supporters, foreign and domestic. They’ll swallow anything no matter how whacked out, nonsense about bugs even.

“He [PM Starmer] will urge for "major surgery, not sticking plaster solutions"” I expect you might get some answers to your questions once the policies in response to this one day old report have been established and published. The Government have already made statements on policy objectives to curb the adverting of ‘junk foods’, the sale of ‘energy drinks’ and to align laws governing the sale of nicotine vapes with those of tobacco. Junk food, high glycemic index foods and tobacco being significant causes of ill health across the nation. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/12/keir-starmer-labour-radical-public-health-drive-junk-food-ads-energy-drinks-nhs

Again, not whataboutary. Refer source of article above.

The number of tie-breaking votes cast is a product of a hung Congress, nothing at all to do with any qualities of the VP.

A lot of words that have zero bearing on the fact that the President sets the policies of the Presidency. There is a clue in the name.

The President sets the policy of the Presidency.

She’s not the President, she doesn’t decide current policies.

It’s not whataboutary Jonny, the article that comprises the OP is from (brace yourself), The Telegraph.

“I have the concept of a plan’” ”Imigrants are eating dogs and cats” ”I saw it on TV” You might be right about Trump and ‘on substance’.