I hate to resort to capitals, but a quick note to Bannon, McConnell, Trump and the rest:

No point pitying the horse: it’ll be glue by now. It’s served its purpose in furnishing their power and therefore has no further use to the GOP other than what can be extracted from its constituent parts.

Paul Ryan’s workout photo. “Never forgets leg day; always forgets spine day.”

Marty Palmer,

I’m about 80-90% sure that NYT article is talking about Trump walking out of an *actual meeting* with Pirro. I just re-read and there is definitely room for ambiguity, but I still think that’s what it meas.

You don’t have to wonder what he thinks now. He thinks exactly what he thought then, and no quantity of evidence will ever make him think differently.

“Prison”? I’m pretty sure you mean “concentration camp”.

Because the US healthcare system exists largely to shovel money into the gaping maw of insurance companies, you manage to spend more public money on healthcare per capita than the UK - where the state provides virtually all healthcare free of charge. I agree that this is phenomenally wasteful.

Surely if questioned under oath he’d say he sent the tweet but it wasn’t true. Tweets aren’t legal testimony and it wouldn’t exactly be hard to demonstrate precedents for Trump lying on Twitter. The risk would be alienating his base by admitting he lies to them, but I imagine it would immediately be spun on Fox as a…

Fortunately most voters in Australia tend to be exposed to Australian media, so I think awareness here was as high as it needed to be.

Sweet lie, loser.

They use gas. Sorry to piss on your chips, but that ain’t barbecuing.

I haven’t seen a single person suggesting the woman doesn’t deserve to be charged. I’ve seen a lot of people saying it’s terrifying that a cop thinks it’s appropriate to punch a woman in the face because she’s being a drunken idiot. BOTH THINGS CAN BE TRUE.

I’ve said this before, but here goes again: the point is not whether legally the cop is within his rights. In fact, yes, he probably has no legal case to answer.

I don’t think anyone’s trying to litigate a future civil prosecution, pal. The point is there is no world in which punching that woman in the face was the appropriate response to the circumstances. You’ve got eyes, come on.

It’s a little known fact that McCullers has for decades carried a seething hatred of the name Dodgers. He just wanted to prove they’re lying.

Kneeling on first down seems more apposite somehow.

UK-trained journalist here. It may be grounds for a libel suit, but there’s no legal aid for libel cases in the UK and they are notoriously expensive. Unless this young woman happens to have the resources necessary to take on the Barclay brothers (Telegraph owners; think Koch UK branch) in court she’s got no chance.

No, he doesn’t realise that. He has a crashing lack of empathy.

I assume the cheerleaders are free to kneel during the anthem indoors where no-one can see them - which is really all the college has done. I’d be surprised if the constitution covers one’s rights to be on a football field at any given moment.