16 and 17-year-olds are going to be allowed to vote in the next election. Congratulations to whichever prick off tik-tok they make PM. I'm not specifically opposed to this move, but I think we need an adult age. The current mish-mash is just odd and makes no sense. You can join the army and have sex (presumably not at the same time) at 16. You can't take a picture of yourself nude and send it to someone else or buy a pint, though.
Ed Davey needs to seriously up his Doris wannabee game. "I'm not specifically opposed to this move, but I think we need an adult age. The current mish-mash is just odd and makes no sense. You can join the army and have sex (presumably not at the same time) at 16. You can't take a picture of yourself nude and send it to someone else or buy a pint, though." I have always said the 'age of ascent' in the UK should be 17. On voting, the EARLIEST you can vote should be 17 (16 yrs old + either one year of military service / paying worker taxes) .
Considering how a sizeable chunk of the electorate were apparently born yesterday, I can't see where the issue is
Trump suing WSJ and Murdoch over 'bawdy birthday card', claiming he's 'never wrote a picture'. Which has come as a surprise to the charity fundraiser who sold two signed pictures in 2004 and a number of purchasers who have spent many thousands on his pictures over the years.... Can't imagine Rupert is too worried, although you can still seeing the Media company making a significant if nominal out of court settlement to keep off The Orange ****s radar for a bit. CBS have just dropped The Late Show for the same reason... https://news.sky.com/story/donald-t...-jeffrey-epstein-birthday-card-claim-13398643
I hope Murdoch keeps his nerve as the chance to interrogate Trump would be game changing. Who knew the Aussie could be a hero.
I'm suspicious of this whole thing. Trump and Murdoch were at the CWC together recently. This is either the right-wing ****ers trying to help him out or he's done. Possibly health related. They completely ****ed the Epstein list response, so either is plausible. Why print that story about the card without showing it? Protecting a source or baiting a lawsuit seem to be the most obvious answers. They will have known that he'd deny it, so either they wanted that to extend the story or they'll fold. If they do roll over, then I'll believe that was the plan from the start. It'll allow his dumbass supporters to wave away the rest of the Epstein ****.
I agree, although Murdoch's grip on his 'empire' is much-reduced. It is quite possible that the publication was done without his say-so. But as you say, there is a level of general Administrative incompetence in Trumps world that suggests they may have ****ed up here too! We live in hope...
I see the Village of the Damned remake is focusing on the important things... please log in to view this image
Time for the weekly comparison of active and passive voice... please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
