I guess it’s “I don’t want to use fossil fuels but I don’t have an alternative. Give me an alternative! Don’t have one? Then I’ll keep using fossil fuels”

In fairness though not using fossil fuels it’s something of a luxury at present. EVs are more expensive that non EVs. Maybe this will change but slowly. Home solar is very expensive and still doesn’t get you self sufficient in most cases. Power companies need to make the grid renewable to make it accessible to the average person for home power.

The problem with this type of thing is intent.

How do we prove intent to deceive?

Lying is not simply stating incorrect information. It is intending to deceive by knowingly stating incorrect information. It is not easy to prove what someone knew.

What if they were misinformed by a third party that may or may not have an agenda? Under these circumstances the politician is not lying and believes they are telling the truth even though the information they uttered is wrong. Do you go after the third party? Does this then give the politician a mechanism to evade charges using fall guys?

I absolutely believe that people like Bojo should be held to account. In his case there was plenty of evidence. It should also be acceptable for the opposition to state that they were lying in the commons without facing repercussions.

When Brent Spiner smiles, I see evil. TNG taught me being good is not showing emotion (Data) being bad is smiling (Lore).

So basically upset that the press do their job??

IMO the main reason for the press to exist is to hold people in power accountable for their actions. It doesn’t matter the lengths they go to to get the information or their motivation. There will always be press looking into politics on both sides of the spectrum and we as the public should be glad for it.

You should not excuse bad behaviour just because they are on your team. You should encourage the press to do their job as long as they don’t go too far into harassment, distortion of the truth or digging up irrelevant personal details about someone that affect noone outside that someone.

I really like the line “democracy does in darkness” because it is so true. Political figures who dislike the press generally have something to hide.

Except there is a big difference in that these people choose to live abroad. They have chosen diminished influence of British politics over their lives so they should have diminished influence over British politics.

If they really want to influence politics here, then live here. It is not fair on resident, tax paying citizens to have non resident non tax paying ex pats making choices that may benefit them at the cost of others.

For example, elderly expats may choose to support a policy which significantly increases their pension to cover their overseas lifestyle at the expense of resident pensioners or increased taxes or reduced public services for resident voters. While this is very unlikely to be proposed or succeed, it is theoretically possible. I’m sorry but if I resign from my job should I still get to make demands of my former colleagues because I worked there for 30 years or still feel like an employee??

I just can’t reconcile the thought “I don’t want to live there anymore” with the thought “I deserve a vote in the country I left behind”.

It was a little different when we were in the EU. But we are not.

“I still feel British so I should get to decide how people in Britain live. I mean does it really matter if the NHS gets privatized as long as my pension gets bigger so I can afford my lavish lifestyle. I care so much about my country just not quite enough to live there.”

Looks like a Jaguar F-pace from all sides except the front.

If counter with: “We’d be well served to remember the long and cherished tradition of settling criminal matters in the courts.”

Basically they want the right to commit crimes without consequences beyond the possibility of simply not being re-elected… But only for Republican politicians. Democrats should be treated differently.

Dear sovcit, we, the government, do not consent to being “served” and invite you to prove that we are an artificial government in 15 days under U.S. 199. Article 4 section N part 9 paragraph 2333. Are we free to go?

Even then you can still have someone read the source and write a spec for a second programmer to write a library. The programmer never saw the source code but it was still useful. Still legal to do this. If someone dumped original source into the projector could be similarly checked for duplication without breaking the law.

It’s Val Kilmer’s superhero name. His super villain name is “Kill more”.

That would be putting words in my mouth.

Firstly, I think that having been a justice, which is a very distinguished post , they would never have to worry about future employment, it would probably find them. I also think that a job for life means you don’t worry about scrutiny. You can do what you want almost without consequence because you don’t need to worry about what comes next. If no one can fire you, and you don’t need to worry about people being happy with your performance, you can be free so act however you want. In your own interest. In the interest of some benefactor, or should you choose to, in the interest of the people.

Second, I did not say youthfulness it’s important. There is a vast gulf between youthful and aged. I don’t want a 20 year old justice and more than a 70 year old one.

Lastly, expanding it would be great. No arguments here.

Yes I agree with that, but age is a strong indicator.

While experience is clearly an important job qualification for a judge, at some point their experience is from a different era. At the beginning of her training the world was a very different place, but she now applies her experience from that era to cases today. I don’t mean to say her experience is entirely irrelevant, just that the old have to give way to the young if progress is to be made. These guys should have age limits if not term limits. At the very least there should be a known point in time that they need to be replaced so that political games cannot be played with their appointments.

To me, modern says more about the techniques and methods used. In that respect, not much has changed even though 25 years has passed. Even stylistically it is more similar to a current film than one filmed 25 years before its release, i.e. mid 1970s. As someone else said, contemporary is a better word for describing its age than modern.

They need to shoulder bump too, otherwise they could just be former colleagues or perhaps two men who met for the first time yesterday.

He’s speaking from personal experience. He knows how many crimes he committed last year and is extrapolating to the wider population.

Not really, the conservatives steam rollered the lib dems. Ultimately it was just a conservative agenda enabled by the lib dems.

You can do this with PowerPoint. After recording it makes the video an object on your slide so you can position it anywhere. Different on each slide if needed.

That’s the least of your worries - no more farting!!!