Search results

You forgot to type!!

I believe Trump was instrumental in the gathering and reckless in his rhetoric and that could be construed as a generous interpretation of events. Not important whether they had guns or not. They fought their way into the building and who knows what would have happened if they found Pence or...

Judging by your responses to everyone it wouldn't surprise us.

Avoiding the question. Mind telling us what you were up to the 6th Jan 2021???

Do you believe that Trump is innocent of everything he's been accused of?

No, away to Wolves!

Not sure if I read that right but are you saying that withdrawing treatment causes terrible and unnecessary suffering? If so, what examples are you thinking of? My understanding is that the courts only get involved when an interested party, usually a parent, can't accept the medical opinion. I...

Big words, hope you're able to back that up with serving the relevant punishment.

Thanks, appreciate the comments but I made reference to Brighton Dave being the one to take action, eye for an eye if that is how strongly he feels. I don't believe the state should enact revenge on behalf of the parents in that scenario.

I'm a massive critic of most professional refs but he did his job without any fuss and no complaints. A few morons around us were moaning at him when the play stopped but that was due to waiting for VAR.

For a share of £95k I wouldn't just expect her to believe, I'd explain it till I was blue in the face!

Your child is inconveniently at the scene of a violent murder, tries to help the victim but ends up covered in blood. Courts convict them and they get executed. How do you feel now? If you feel that much about eye for an eye, then carry out the reciprocal crime yourself, don't expect the...

One of them was given a whole life sentence so will never be out and the other has to serve a minimum of 46 years with no guarantee he'll be let out then. You're trying to make it sound like they'll get out in a few years with good behaviour.

It can, and probably is, both for most of us. You can't have murder as a crime in the eyes of the law and the state then commits murder, it doesn't work as a deterrent, and when the courts get it wrong, there's no going back.

It's easy to pick out the clear cut cases but that's not reality. Either every case is a guaranteed slam dunk or none are if the ultimate punishment is death.

Still boils down to the fact Jaz would not vote for a banishment if he was a traitor. On that basis, she should have realized that if Jaz was right about Harry and she voted out Harry, she'd get at least half the pot. By ignoring that, and still believing neither were traitors she gambled on...

Jaz had more of a chance with a toss of the coin than he did leaving Mollie and her beau, Harry, in the final 3.

How stupid is Mollie? Why would Jaz vote for a banishment if he was a traitor? As a traitor, he'd either take the lot or share the pot if he's in the final two. Jaz didn't argue the case well (unless the edit didn't show it). He should have gone for Harry and not Andrew. Does anyone know...

In life, timing is everything

Assume that if this stays a draw then the replay is the week before our game against Spuds!!