If Andrew Neil couldn't see what millions of people could see clearly, based on the evidence of Trump's own words and deeds, why should he be taken seriously as a political commentator?
Reposted from
Ben Stanley
Well how very prescient of you, Andrew.
Comments
Anyone slightly paying attention knew this would be the end result of a second Trump term. He laid it out in the open and published it in document form.
Only he got there and found the mine was already full of canaries signing loud.
'The 814-page report released late Thursday comes after the panel interviewed more than 1,000 witnesses, held 10 hearings and obtained more than a million pages of documents.'
...'consider barring Trump from holding future office.'
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-lit-that-fire-of-capitol-insurrection-jan-6-committee-report-says
He boosted Trump to help get him elected.
Now Trump has harmed the economy he needs to deboost him.
He'll about turn when tax cuts are on the agenda.
He's either senile, an unquestioning clueless dupe or a liar.
Someone from a working class background who was able to take advantage of the benefits of the postwar welfare state- universal child benefit; no university fees; full student grant
He then pulled the ladder up firmly behind him & has since backed every welfare cut going
He's part of 'that crowd' in the media, of 'commentators' and 'talking heads' who regularly appear in the media who add nothing to society/country and have been well paid for being...well, crap.
Absolute dickhead.
They've always known what Trump was and what he was willing to do. It never bothered them when they weren't in the line of fire.