Verbal

You go ahead and give blind support to the American Jimmy Savile if you like. But just so you know, it's not a good look.

Hardly surprisingly, you don't address the point. While you sit cosily on your superannuated pension, inoculated from the effects of Brexit, what do you say to those on benefits who will experience losses on breadline income as a result of inflation following the (ongoing) nosedive of the pound? As I say, prove that you actually give a ****.

I wonder what the Brexiteers will say to those on benefits, which (unlike your pension) are frozen until 2019/20 while inflation is set to rise to 3.5% pa. As you want to have your cake and eat it, I imagine 'let them eat cake' will fit pretty well. Aren't you luck you don't have to give a ****?

We're gonna get a huge deal. You've never seen a deal this huge. Really. It's such a beautiful deal. And we're gonna make Germany pay for it.

Correct.

According to fact checkers, 91% of Trump's pronouncements are lies. http://www.thebrofessional.net/91-percent-donald-trump-says-lie/ Your friend is deluded.

Your first sentence is actually correct. The EU negotiators were the speedsters. It was the Canadians who dragged their feet, largely because of regional issues (think Scotland and N Ireland with our negotiations, whenever we get round to, you know, actually having a plan). CETA tells us a great deal about how thing will go. As will the Swiss climbdown.

Brexiter violence part 52...and some human stories behind the appalling statistics. In just one edition of the Evening Standard yesterday, two examples of people being threatened and physically assaulted: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-london-businesswoman-leading-legal-challenge-against-theresa-may-sent-death-threats-and-a3368756.html http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/i-never-thought-it-would-happen-to-me-man-kicked-by-thugs-five-days-after-brexit-a3368461.html With the Home Office, Metropolitan police and other police forces all reporting an upsurge in this kind of violence after the vote, Brexiters who are honest with themselves will have to consider the company they keep. The dishonest ones will just resort to the usual abuse and violent (significantly) language.

Nope. More Brexiter violence evidence - again clearly linked to the vote. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/28/hate-crime-horrible-spike-brexit-vote-metropolitan-police

More official evidence on the rise of Brexiter violence: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/13/hate-crimes-eu-referendum-home-office-figures-confirm

Yet more kabooms from locker rooms. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/12/donald-trump-women-new-sexual-harassment-stories

The bits of the candidates' debate that were left out... http://www.luckytv.nl/time-of-my-life/

Your apoplexy is amusing. And in any case, you've made your bed - you lie in it. https://twitter.com/YupThatExist/status/785933299504078849

Strange indeed. I doubt that golden rule of winning in your state, Ohio, to win the Presidency even applies, because Trump has alienated so many of the key demographics to stand even a faintly realistic chance. Thankfully. I do think though that the weirdness of this election is specific to the campaign - and in the remote prospect of Trump winning, almost all of the stuff he talks about will simply be impossible. For example, in an echo of many Brexiteers he blames trade and immigration for destroying American jobs, when in reality it's new technology. So becoming protectionist and (in effect) white supremacist (again, like some Brexiteers, favouring white 'Commonwealth') simply won't happen without crashing the economy...and destroying jobs. President Trump (*shudder*) will also discover other realities to do with race. His campaign equivalence of the 'hell' of 'inner cities' with black people is a nonsense that can't be translated into policy. For a start, the majority of black Americans don't live in the (often gentrified) inner cities. And while blacks continue to do worse than whites on measures of health, education, wealth and jobs, they do considerably better proportionately than they used to. So when Trump talks about 'making America great again' his rosy view of the past is of a time when blacks were considerably worse off. All that aside though, a Trump presidency would see the fastest route from inauguration to impeachment in American history.

I wouldn't worry too much about Trump winning. Given his history, his psychology and his ignorance, he'd be impeached in no time flat. He actually gave solid grounds for impeachment yesterday with his promise to Clinton that if he won he'd appoint a special prosecutor 'to put you in jail.' This is pretty much one of the articles (2.5 to be exact) of impeachment of Richard Nixon: http://watergate.info/impeachment/articles-of-impeachment

You'd be better off using Fortran.

Two minor difficulties. One is that depriving anyone accused of a criminal offence of a trial lawyer would be against the American Constitution (it's the 6th Amendment if you want to look it up). And the other is that, because of this constitutional right, the judge in the case instructed Hillary Clinton to take the case. She had no choice but to accept. But the fact we or anyone else are even discussing this shows how Trump has dragged a Presidential into the quagmire. I think the kindest thing to say is he went low. It will easily go down as the worst presidential debate of all time. Rather than bother with impressions, maybe it's just better to go straight to the fact checkers. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/09/presidential-debate-fact-check-donald-trump-hillary-clinton

I do apologise if posting a link from the Jewish Chronicle offends you, Condomboy. I can see how that invades your safe space.

Donald Trump vs Robert De Niro. Travis Bickle wins. https://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2016/oct/08/robert-de-niro-id-like-to-punch-donald-trump-in-the-face-video We'll see how this plays out. Trump supporters will no doubt hear about this bragging on the bus and think 'Go Donald!'. But he can't be elected by his supporters alone. Others will hear a man now going for the highest office in the US sneering about how he can routinely use his fame to attack women. There's a whiff of Donald Savile about his language. However long ago he said or did it - as with Savile - won't diminish the offence in the eyes of many, including those he counts on among Republicans. Looking at the reaction overnight, Trump is in the quicksand.

Well if this doesn't blow Trump out the water I suppose nothing will. The Washington Post has gone nuclear: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-conversation-about-women-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html (The stories people tell when they forget that have radio mics on...)

Again, for me the biggest issue with Chakrabarti isn't her personal hypocrisy but the fact of the whitewash itself and her unconcern about the reality or the appearance of that. Remember, this was someone who wasn't even a Labour party member until a few weeks ago - and then in quick succession accepted an offer to chair the Jew-baiting inquiry, joined the Labour party, produced a sanitised report, accepted a seat in the House of Lords, and is made a senior party spokesperson. It must be the fastest rise to power in political history! Meanwhile the real damage of her whitewash continues unabated. There are many particular instance of the whitewash but here's one damming example: http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/161658/claims-antisemitism-labour-whitewashed-chakrabarti-inquiry To ignore first-hand reports of mutterings about a "Jewish conspiracy" at the very heart of the leadership team is astonishing. Meanwhile, the Jew-hating continues. Here's an innocent looking tweet by a Labour councillor, thanking some named supporters: https://twitter.com/joshbrandwood/status/779689717302452225 Those 'supporters' include a Trotskyist from TUSC who repeats anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, a supporter ejected from the Labour party for racism, and a promoter of neo-Nazi website called Veterans Today. It's everywhere. Before it's deletion, and in the BTL of a Guardian article by one of its Jewish writers, I caught this: Paul Crow 1m ago Can you be a journalist at the Guardian and have a foreskin? If you check out the author you'll see he's a particularly aggressive Corbynista. With Chabrakarti's whitewash, the Jew haters in the party evidently feel emboldened. Beyond depressing.

The more salient point is that in promoting the private-school-educating Abbott, and having promoted the multimillionaire Thornberry in the last reshuffle, the Leader, Shadow Home Secretary and Shadow Foreign Secretary are all in adjoining north London constituencies (and McDonnell is not far away in NW London). Never in all its history has the Labour party been dominated by a ruinous clique so tightly focused in a tiny bubble of liberal, middle class, public-sector, metropolitan London. I wonder what Labour voters in the regional heartlands will make of that?

Chuka Ummuna asked Amber Rudd about a month ago how many EU citizens were employed by the Home Office and its agencies and departmental public bodies. The Answer? "The Home Office undertakes checks to confirm that potential candidates meet eligibility requirement to work in the UK. However, the Home Office does not record the nationality of employees on our IT systems and is unable to provide this information." Right. So it'll only be the private sector then who'll have to out their non-UK citizens. But as a policy it all makes sense of course: "It is very important that companies declare how much of their workforce is foreign because they're just domiciled in this state simply as earners of their livelihood...You have to draw a sharp distinction between those who are members of the nation and those who are just domiciled here as earners of their livelihoods." Which by the way is from Mein Kampf, chapter 2.

This is superb. https://medium.com/@mrdavidwhitley/the-first-letter-i-have-ever-written-to-my-mp-99da6d206359#.1gzh3lrsj

Would that be the same 'socialism' of Corbyn's closest political ally in the Commons Lady Nugee (aka Emily Thornberry), and her £4 million property empire? She's a vacuous hypocrite, and if you think she represents the path to socialism, with her rich-sneering-at-the-poor photo of white van man's house, good luck... On which subject, I see that in the same week that we discover the shocking extent of Brexiter violence after the referendum... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-david-cameron-nigel-farage-council-of-europe-report-racist-violence-intolerance-hate-speech-a7345166.html ...the Tories, in the form of the ludicrous Amber Rudd, announced yesterday her plan to name and shame companies with foreign workers. Aside from having to check that this is 21st century Britain and not post-1933 Germany, the willingness of Rudd to stoke anti-foreign sentiment, in the manner of Farage's 'breaking point' poster (launched on the day Jo Cox was hacked and shot to death) is genuinely frightening. We should also presumably all run companies in the way Rudd herself does. In her eight years as MD, it paid not a single penny in corporation tax - at least in part because of the involvement in her company affairs of her father, Tony Rudd. Rudd senior, who was paid substantial 'fees' by Rudd junior, was at the time banned from being a director after asset stripping another company. He'd also been investigated not once but three times by the then DTI. Honestly, between the sanctimonious 'socialist' multi-millionaire Thornberry and the pompous, non-tax-paying Rudd, it does seem that recent events have displaced the political class with the cretinous class.