Chomper Higgot

As you rightly said above, ‘the article implies’, it does a lot of implying while providing no ‘apparently available facts’ to substantiate what the article ‘implies’. I’ve given an example above. The ‘fact’ of increased litigation is not an indication of any issues with recruitment, other causes, such as society becoming increasingly litigious might be a cause. So yes you’re correct, ‘implies’ and ‘apparently available facts’ but not actual evidence, nothing that can be actually examined as cause and effect. Though it plays well to some.

Or just through plain prejudice on the part of the author.

It’s left for the fetid imagination of their target audience to make the pejorative assumption. Just as it is with this statement: Absolutely no evidence that the increase in negligence claims has anything at all to do with who’s hired but the suggestion it is seeded into the minds of those eager to believe it is.

How did that workout the last time an Italian got ideas along those lines?

Correct, and add continual exams that must be passed during their medical degree studies, training assessments that must be passed and a medical license that will not be issued unless the applicant had passed all exams and training

Perhaps time for anyone other than the police entering school premises with a gun to be regarded as a legitimate target and shot on sight.

Are you still sticking to your view that the January 25 inflation rate was unacceptably high ?

Once again misrepresenting the facts Jonny. Let’s check the record: https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/updated-sentence-childminder-admits-inciting-racial-hatred-over-social-media-post

I don’t know why you felt the need to make such a declaration.

So how do you know it was him if her was wearing a mask? One of those reports you can’t find?

‘Lawfare’ would imply some semblance of judicial process. You the ‘judicial process’ you expect if ever you are arrested.

It seems this is precisely the Malicious Deep State Trump and his supporters, both foreign and domestic, have been saying is a law unto itself.

It’s arrived already, the accusation of protesters being supporters of Hamas. Laced with conspiracy for good measure.

Can you explain to me what part the UK Home Office plays in prosecuting allegations made in Bangladesh? Give it your best go Jonny.

That cuts both ways.

His removal from the US to El Salvador was in defiance of a court order. Do try to keep up.

Here’s a bit of reading for you: https://clearwaterlawgrouptricities.com/5-rights-of-undocumented-immigrants/ I look forward to you producing credible links to refute my statements and indeed those of the link here attached.

ThT’s nothing more than an admission on your part that you know his deportation was an illegal.

Oh so now ‘Adjudicated’ is guilty. That’s not going to lay well elsewhere. Which clause of the constitution gives the executive the power to ignore a court order?

He was under court orders not the deported: “In October 2019, an immigration judge denied Abrego Garcia’s asylum request but granted him protection from being deported back to El Salvador because of a “well-founded fear” of gang persecution, according to his case. He was released and ICE did not appeal.” https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/article/who-is-kilmar-abrego-garcia-the-man-ice-20265371.php

He doesn’t have to be innocent. His, and everyone else’s Constitutional rights and rights to due process are not dependent on guilt or innocence, certainly not on assumptions of guilt that has not been proven in an open court of law.

Again, ignorance of judicial process and constitutional rightsz Look them up.

Let’s see your corrections.

The correct place to deal with such allegations is a court of law, the correct place t process to deal with such accusations is the criminal justice system. Not detention without charges, deportation without trial and all in direct contradiction to court orders from federal judges to the SCOTUS.

What part of “I have no idea. Which is why I don’t say she is or isn’t’.” are you struggling to understand?