@ClarkesLatin@BarristerSecret I think where you’ve gone wrong here, Ed, is believing that something printed in the Daily Mail can accurately be described as “reporting” of a case….
@AllisonPearson No it isn’t. It’s about deterrent sentencing in the context of widespread serious public disorder. Just as happened in 2012. Why don’t you post a link to the carefully reasoned Court of Appeal judgment?
@IsabelOakeshott “If she had been better represented”? The legal advice she was given was beyond reproach. I’ll just leave a copy the judgment here for anyone who wants to read it, rather than your grifting.
https://t.co/VeAWQNFNv0
@Bugbeargrowling@IsabelOakeshott If you knew the first thing about the law you would know that the Sentencing Guidelines Council is an independent body. Try actually reading the guideline rather than latching on to a sound bite written by someone intent on fomenting anger
@EdKrassen This was a reminder to Farage not to fawn over Putin, not a direct rebuke to Trump. Twisting words to suit either a left or right wing narrative is both unhelpful and dangerous.
@GoodwinMJ Can you define the “elite consensus” and “urban elite” that you keep banging on about, because I haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about and it sounds rather like dog whistling?
@RichardJMurphy He essentially said that the NHS is full of data, and that using AI to harness that data was an obvious way to improve efficiency. To transpose that for “he does not see the reason for much of what junior doctors do” is disingenuous, in my view
@LozzaFox@SadiqKhan I wouldn’t bank too much on the “working” here if I were you. For some reason your services aren’t as much in demand as they used to be…
@CJCHowarth@afjmcloughlin What were the practical, legal and constitutional differences with the Law Lords, other than they are no longer members of the legislature, and moved to a building across the street?
@afneil That’s my point. The Tory party didn’t set out to produce those outcomes - they result from a fundamental misreading of what creates capitalist dynamism and a good society. Instead of reflecting on why policy produced the opposite of what it intended, you double down on failure.