Chomper Higgot

It was a Tory majority parliament. It was the Tory MP’s who submitted letters to the 1922 committee to toss her out. Had she passed her fiscally insane plan by the OBR they would have had the chance to advise against unfounded tax cuts, she obviously thought it a good idea to leave the teaching of the lesson to the markets. People in the UK who are paying mortgages are still faced with the bill.

Steady on. Nobody is arguing there shouldn’t be a trial. There are those arguing Trump should be above the law. Pick a side on that.

Truss has a grudge against the Office of Budget Responsibility (there’s a clue in the name). She neglected to inform them of her fiscally insane plan and then went on to push the economy to the brink of collapse. She’s a raving lunatic. Even so, she does have her admirers.

She was removed by the Tories because of her fiscal insanity. What truths did she tell?

Trump’s criminal trial starts Monday, Screaming Hillary is already underway.

Pinned

No. Trump is indicted for his part in the same crimes that Michael Cohen was convicted of and sent to prison for. Michael Cohen, you will recall, was indicted, tried, found guilty and imprisoned while Trump was President. Trump’s administration went after Cohen and secured a conviction. Now it’s Trump’s turn in the barrel. Get the popcorn!

AND ” In addition, the overt act that follows the agreement doesn’t necessarily have to be an illegal act. It just has to be some act that demonstrates that the agreement is now being acted upon.”

Don’t be impatient, the trial starts with jury selection commencing Monday. Meanwhile we have the judge’s summary of the case against Defendant Trump: “The allegations are in substance that Donald Trump falsified business records to conceal an agreement with others to unlawfully influence the 2016 election. ”

From your the link you posted: ” In addition, the overt act that follows the agreement doesn’t necessarily have to be an illegal act. It just has to be some act that demonstrates that the agreement is now being acted upon.”

Don’t ever use that as a defense. The criteria for a conspiracy to become a felony is taking any step in furtherance of the crime. Actus reus. So in your bank robbery example, conspiring to rob a bank becomes a crime the moment any action is taken in preparation for the robbery - eg you conspired to rob the bank then you went to the bank to ‘case the joint’.

I don’t place any trust Iran ‘living up to their part’. Which is precisely why the treaty included inspections. There’s no such thing as ‘Budenbucks’

We also no longer have a nuclear weapons treaty with Iran. Trashing that was really good idea… not.

If Liz Truss’ memoir has more than five pages she’s padding it out.

I wonder were you got that from 😉

Like ‘They’re stealing the election’?!

She’s not dead yet.

Except now we have a bunch of people ranting against tackling climate change who also rant against migrants.

So conspiracy to commit a crime is not a crime in and of itself if the conspiracy does not result in the conspired crime being committed?

The story here is person found liable avoids paying the penalties award against him in a civil court ruling. Obviously that’s not a good thing for Justice. I trust we all support the idea that justice is best served when those who are found liable in a court trial are forced to pay their penalties.

No it’s not. It’s an example of not getting the expected verdict therefore attacking the jury. I predict it to be a theme throughout 2024 and one you might want to keep any eye on.

There is absolutely no case for ‘Professional Jurors’.

More snide innuendo.

Agreed. And here’s the idiocy of the rightwing argument. The Tory’s failed Rwanda plan has never once been put before the European Court of Human Rights. Each successful challenge to the ‘plan’ has come from the UK courts ruling on matters of UK law. What is actually going on is the extreme rightwing, a bunch of hyper wealthy old school chums (AKA the very elite that they claim to be opposing) are using the Tory failure to control immigration as an argument to get rid of human rights law.

The absolute nonsense is the suggestion that the UK should leave the convention. It’s an extremist rightwing fantasy. It’s not going to happen for the reasons I’ve explained and many others, not least Reform UK are doing a great job destroying the Tory Party.