I really miss your blog. I hope its return is imminent.

(By which I mean that I entirely agree with you that the whole thing is a nothingburger. And thanks for all your great work.)

I see now why you phrased it as you did. In your entire thread that was the only thing that would've made my whiskers twitch if I were one of HMRC's finest. Which I'm not.

Just curious, but what does "she removed her name from the deeds" mean? That she sold or gifted her share? This sort of language smells of obfuscation. I assume it was her designated primary residence at the time.

That the story came from Murdoch makes me wonder whether the Project 2025 people have dedided that it's the right time to dump the useful moron and install Vance. I suspect more well-timed revelations will be forthcoming.
/tinfoil_hat

Your point is entirely valid. But, let´s be clear, it wouldn´t be being introduced if the (any) governing party hadn´t already worked out that it would benefit them electorally.

If it was about having a more democratic system they would introduce PR.

I find this debate to be wholly disingenuous.

MAGA1: "What's an enigma?"

MAGA2: "Oh, they're wonderful. A nurse gave me one the other day. I like to think of it as President Trump draining my swamp. God bless President Trump."

MAGA1: "God bless President Trump."

A pebbledash?