Chomper Higgot

What? I called you out for your Strawman argument regarding FOX stating ‘The election was rigged’ and pointed out that’s not why FOX are in court. The matter is before the court, let’s see what the court has to say.

Off topic wedge.

Lie and go to prison, tell the truth and loose hundreds of millions of dollars, A tough choice for an old man. And there’s more to come.

Strawman argument. FOX are not in court for saying ‘The election was rigged’.

Clear Congressional overreach, slap it down.

Plenty of splendid options in the Democrat Party, it’s not a one horror race.

The move here is to protect the Jurors from Trump.

It plays well to the rightwing. Simple solutions offered for complex problems, and the possibility of some cruelty too.

The ruling to keep the identities of the jurors secret is significant, a move normally reserved for the trials of extremely violent criminals and criminal gangs. The Judge very wisely treating Trump’s history of inciting violence as tge serious threat it is.

Growth as in percentage change. The UK’s growth was a function of how far behind the UK economy was and remains.

Bringing jobs to America and as predicted Clean Energy initiatives creating jobs in America. Well done President Biden.

Is leaving people with the only option of paying criminals to put them in over crowded boats a valid reason to continue the UK Government policy of not providing piratical access to legal means to claim the right to refugee status in the UK without having to put their lives at risk to do so? Again, where is this sympathy you tell us you have for ‘genuine refugees’?

Right so a person who meets all the criteria of a ‘genuine refugee’ can never be a genuine refugee because there are no legal means to travel to the UK available to them. Where’s your sympathy for these people?

Foolishly? Unless you have evidence of why they each took the actions they did take how do you determine they acted foolishly? Or are you making a gross uninformed and pejorative generalization?

It has to be hypocritical, because you have zero logical argument to support the protection of the hyper wealthy in the US at cost to the national debt and essential social welfare programs.

Bizarre whataboutary.

Can you point to the text within the Second Amendment of Constitution that mentions deterrent to criminality, I seem to have missed it.

On what basis do you claim anyone here is rich or has an unpaid tax liability in Thailand? Or was that simply an attempt to take the discussion off track?

I don’t recall you making that argument when over $1.3 Trillion was handed out as tax breaks to the hyper wealthy?

The debt made worse by tax give always to the already hyper wealthy.

Then let’s start with examining wealth distribution, the majority are in favor.

Because the economy of a nation the size of the US equates to the imagined profligacy of imagined individuals. How about examining the distribution of wealth?

15 minute cities are what existed before the advent of public transport and motorized vehicles.

A clear majority is deluded?

I agree. The sooner they vote in their own interests and not in the interests of a tiny hyper wealthy minority the better.