Two alternatives:
Either they imagined the third world immigrants would magically integrate into the UK - in which case they’re stupid
Or they knew they wouldn’t integrate but let them in anyway - in which case they’re evil.
@MurrayHillGuy1 I'm independent but sometimes miss the office life (ended around 2018). I can't imagine working with a bunch of douchebags every day and worrying about some useless hr bitches auditing my beliefs.
When a solar farm gets built on timberland, the tax per acre goes up 150x, from $180 to $24k. ~80 acres pays for a school kid in perpetuity. Data centers are even more lucrative.
Poor, high-tax counties like Baltimore city could benefit immensely from data centers but sadly they are run by fools.
@Tim30do@RupertLowe10 Imagine being elected to represent a country and then doing everything possible to prioritize the desires of random African and middle-easterners over the citizens of your country.
@charlesmurray Hart Celler Act was 1965 along with the rest of the Great Society. The "greatest generation" pols supported most of what is destroying the country today.
The oldest boomers were just turning 18 (26th amendment was ratified in 1971) when this all happened.
@TheAliceSmith Jihadis are a mix of bottom quintile inbreds and malevolent misfits akin to western woke activists.
The Muslim non-democracies understand this trash and keep it contained away from their societies. Unlike the "diversity is our strength" fools in the west.
The E. Jean Carroll case against President Trump is one of the strangest civil cases in American history. The foundational problem is this: Carroll could not identify when the alleged incident occurred — not even the year with any precision.
That should have killed the case as dead as a skunk on the road right there.
Without a temporal anchor, no defendant — regardless of guilt or innocence — can mount an alibi defense. Trump, who has maintained detailed calendars and staff records for decades, was denied the most basic tool of self-defense: the ability to establish where he was. That is not a technicality. It is a due process violation at the constitutional level.
Then Carroll produced the one piece of physical evidence she claimed corroborated her account — the dress she wore during the alleged incident. It was subsequently established that the dress was designed after the incident could have occurred. The sole corroborating evidence falsified her timeline.
The case proceeded anyway.
The resulting verdict was then weaponized in a defamation suit — where Trump was held liable for denying the allegation, while being procedurally barred from defending against it, because it was already "proven" in another court, regardless how flawed the procedure was. He was punished, in effect, for asserting his own innocence.
Compounding everything: coordinated professional and physical threats so thoroughly intimidated the legal community that attorneys refused these cases regardless of available fees. When you systematically destroy a defendant's ability to retain counsel of choice, you forfeit the right to a legitimate verdict.
An allegation is not evidence. Process without substance is not law. And a verdict produced under these conditions carries no legitimate authority — whatever its formal status.
Not only is it the right move to investigate Carroll, but every other person involved as well. Trump is owed serious damages here, and there may be a few people who belong in prison for their roles in the case.