Atos Pays Out For Negligent PIP Assessment

A court has forced a discredited government contractor to pay £2,500 compensation to a disabled woman after a negligent disability benefit assessment left her in debt and experiencing significant mental anguish.

Atos, which failed to defend the case, basically ignored the order to pay the compensation awarded by the county court but was ultimately forced to pay up after being visited by debt enforcement officers.

Rebecca, from Stockton on Tees (not her real name), had decided to seek compensation from Atos for negligence and a failure of its duty of care because of the two-year ordeal she was put through after a face to face personal independence payment (PIP) assessment in April 2018.

The assessment led to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) removing all her PIP daily living support, which meant she also lost associated benefits including severe disability premium and council tax discount, although she did continue to get a payment for PIP mobility.

She and her partner, John, who had accompanied her to the assessment, had been shocked when they read the report written by the nurse who evaluated her.

Rebecca had explained in detail the impact on her daily life of epilepsy and a resulting heart condition, anxiety, depression and memory problems.

She had told the nurse how she couldn’t manage her medication, needed independent living aids to dress and wash, forgets what she has read before finishing a passage, needs help to pay her bills, and becomes anxious when mixing with people she doesn’t know.

But despite the oral and written evidence she presented, the nurse assessor gave her zero points for the daily living component of PIP.

Fortunately, John had recorded the assessment using specialist equipment he had provided himself, although Atos had twice forced Rebecca to postpone the test because the assessor was not qualified to be recorded, and he says the recording revealed how the nurse repeatedly distorted the information she was told.

Despite the recording being available to DWP, a mandatory reconsideration confirmed the decision to withdraw the daily living part of Rebecca’s PIP claim.

The decision plunged her into debt and left her requiring counselling.

When her case was eventually heard by an appeal tribunal in December 2019, the panel listened to the recording of the assessment and compared it with the nurse’s written report, and found unanimously in Rebecca’s favour.

They restored her entitlement to the enhanced daily living component of PIP and extended her award to 2023. She was already in the support group for employment and support allowance.

This was the third time Rebecca had been forced to appeal to a tribunal after an inaccurate Atos assessment and DWP decision on her claim.

She finally got a payment from DWP for the arrears she was owed for unpaid PIP and severe disability premium.

Even then, she was called for another face to face assessment just days later and had to rely on an intervention from her MP, Alex Cunningham, to secure an admission from DWP that her PIP award was now not due to end until 2023, and an apology for any distress the mistake may have caused.

Rebecca said that she was furious and frustrated at having to explain every two to three years that her epilepsy was a lifelong condition, with no known cure, and how it affects her day to day existence while knowing that whatever she says she will once again have to go through another appeal and tribunal, and that the entire process of PIP assessments leaves her traumatised, humiliated, fearful and in a state of anxiety.

Rishi Sunak Confirms Universal Credit Will Be Cut By £20 A Week In October

Rishi Sunak confirmed that Universal Credit will be cut for people across the country in October.

During an interview, the Tory Chancellor was questioned about the UK Government’s plans going forward to support more disadvantaged families.

He said the £20 a week uplift in the benefit would not be continued beyond the end of September despite concerns that families could face a cliff edge.

The increase in Universal Credit was first put in place in April last year due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Rishi Sunak announced during the Budget the additional £20 would be prolonged by six months after it had been due to run out throughout the first two weeks of April.

MPs from across the house blasted the Chancellor, saying it should be extended for a whole year while families get back on their feet.

The Resolution Foundation said the cut off in spending will cause a seven per cent drop in income for the most disadvantaged families across the country.

Questioned if he will extend it beyond another six months, Rishi Sunak told BBC Breakfast that no, they put this in position at the beginning of the crisis last year to help people in the national lockdown and that the restrictions had gone on for longer than any of them would have expected or wanted.

However, six months extension to the Universal Credit uplift means it will be in place well beyond the end of this national lockdown and asked why he wasn’t phasing out the £20, he argued it’s in place in full, all the way through to the end of September, which was a more generous approach than what he could have done, cutting it from the summer.

David Linden, the SNP’s Work and Pensions spokesperson, said that extending the lifeline for only 6 months instead of making it permanent and rolling it out to legacy benefits, of which an excessive amount of claimants are carers or sick or disabled, is an unforgivable failure from the Chancellor, and that it will see millions face a cliff edge in six months, as well as plunge hundreds of thousands into poverty.

He said that maintaining and prolonging the uplift was the bare minimum the UK government should be doing to make up for the decade of Tory austerity cuts that have exacerbated poverty and destitution.

However, anyone with more than two brain cells knows that nothing in life is free and that all this money would have to be paid back over the next few years.

Had our NHS been up to standard from the start of the pandemic, it would have been a great deal easier, but years of underfunding and the closure of hospitals has left us in a state of being unable to cope.

So, now, financially, the whole country is in a sorry state, and the NHS will miss out again, and we can only hope that the vaccine will eradicate the virus in the long run because whole regions of Britain are in dire straights and the longer the lockdown last the less chance of any kind of redemption.

This pandemic has been poorly managed by Westminster, but then no living politician has had to face anything like this, so no one should start looking for scapegoats.

Look on the bright side, some people survived, but many poor souls didn’t, and it’s time politicians were the ones on minimum wage because there are lots of people out there that are sick to death of all the perks they get, with all their fingers in all the healthcare pies they slowly privatise.

People need to wake up and boot the greedy Tories into a reality check because to cripple the poor by taking another £20 from them is repugnant by anyone’s moral standards.

Take away their free bar bills and free restaurants in Westminster for a start, and all from our taxes.

UK Government May Start Offering Financial Rewards For Becoming Healthier

The government is expanding access to weight loss services and may start giving people financial rewards for maintaining a healthy lifestyle as part of the fight against obesity.

The Department of Health and Social Care is giving the NHS and local councils in England £70 million to pay for up to 700,000 overweight or obese people to go on weight management courses, such as those provided by Weight Watchers or Slimming World, or work with a personal trainer to help them discard unwanted pounds.

Also, it asked Sir Keith Mills, the author of the Nector and air miles rewards scheme, to look into whether financial incentives would motivate people to eat better and exercise more.

He will look at whether initiatives such as the national step challenge in Singapore could work in England.

Citizens will be given cash payments if they do a certain amount of physical exercise, such as walking and running, and their progress will be measured through wearable devices.

Research printed in the British Medical Journal last year found that 1.6 million Singaporeans, 26 per cent of the population, had taken part in the government-backed scheme.

In return for undertaking certain numbers of steps, partakers received health points, which they could exchange for rewards worth up to US $10.

Downing Street has recently been examining the use of financial incentives to encourage people to lead healthier, more active lives and privately solicited the opinions of leading health charities, such as the British Heart Foundation and Cancer Research UK.

Boris Johnson, who has become set to undertake significant action against Britain’s obesity crisis after his stint in hospital last year with COVID, endorsed the latest government action on bulging waistlines.

Aides say that he’s slimmed down from a reported 108kg (17 stone) at the time he went into St Thomas’s hospital and is eating more healthily and taking regular exercise.

The Prime Minister said that losing weight was difficult, but that making little changes could make a huge difference.

He said that being overweight raised the risk of becoming ill with COVID and that if we all do our bit, we could lessen the health risks and also take the pressure off the NHS.

Katherine Jenner, the campaign director of Action on Sugar and Action on Salt, and an academic at the Queen Mary University of London said that whilst some useful weight management support services were essentially accessed through the NHS. Many were usually limited, underfunded and had long waiting lists.

But nothing seems to make people as obsessed with food as belonging to Slimming World and Weight Watchers. Of course, there’s the occasional success story, but it’s usually short-lived.

They don’t actually promote a healthy lifestyle, but calorie counting and an obsession with scales, and it’s a totally unhealthy relationship with food where it becomes the focus of everything.

At the same time they sell snacks et cetera that are packed with sugar to keep people addicted because of course, they wouldn’t want to run out of business if they made everyone thin.

Their plan is to use psychological tactics, where they’ll tell you that you can lose weight and still have some sins. That you can still eat the food that is bad for you, and still lose weight because they want you to lose the weight slowly so that you keep having to pay them for longer.

It also perpetuates the unhelpful way of believing that food is a reward, or depriving ourselves of something as a punishment, such as being good or being bad, and it’s a twisted way of thinking, but it also keeps you dependent on an external entity, almost like a cult, rather than finding the resilience and strength within to lose the weight.

Prince Philip, 99, Undergoes Heart Surgery At St Bart’s

Buckingham Palace said in a statement that Prince Philip, underwent the procedure at St Bart’s, where he’d been transferred earlier this week.

A royal reporter wrote on Twitter that the Iron Duke was fighting back and it was wonderful, and one royal fan said that it was really good news and that hopefully, he will be 100 per cent fine again soon.

Another wrote: “Poor Prince Philip. Wish him a speedy recovery.”

Prince Philip was admitted to hospital on February 16 after feeling unwell.

At the time the palace did not disclose what the Duke was suffering from, and sources emphasised the Duke had been taken to King Edward VII Hospital out of an abundance of caution.

The following week, Buckingham Palace gave an update, saying the Duke of Edinburgh was suffering from an infection.

On Monday, 14 days after he was first admitted to the hospital, Prince Philip was taken to St Bartholomew’s Hospital for testing and treatment.

The statement read: “The Duke of Edinburgh was today transferred from King Edward VII’s Hospital to St Bartholomew’s Hospital where doctors will continue to treat him for an infection, as well as undertake testing and observation for a pre-existing heart condition.

“The Duke remains comfortable and is responding to treatment but is expected to remain in hospital until at least the end of the week.”

Prince Philip was rushed to Papworth Hospital in 2011 after experiencing chest pain and received treatment for a blocked artery.

Last week, both Prince William and Prince Edward had opened up on the Duke’s health condition, and during his first face to face engagement of 2021, the Duke of Cambridge said his grandfather was okay and doctors were keeping an eye on him.

Similarly, the Earl of Wessex told Sky News that his father was a lot better, and he said that as far as he was aware, he was a lot better and his father was looking forward to getting out and that they would keep their fingers crossed.

The last member of the Royal Family to give an update on Prince Philip’s health was Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, and during a visit to the Community Vaccination Centre at St Paul’s Church in Croydon, the Duchess said that they’d heard that he was slightly improving, and that was very good news.

Prince Philip, 99, Begins Second Full Day At Specialist Cardiac Centre

Prince Philip starts his second full day at a specialist cardiac centre at St Bart’s after 14 days at nearby King Edward VII hospital due to an infection.

Buckingham Palace said that the 99-year-old is now receiving continuing treatment for an infection, as well as testing and observation for a pre-existing heart condition.

The Queen, who’s being kept constantly updated about her husband’s health, will not be allowed to visit him at St Bart’s and is thought to unlikely see him until he leaves.

She didn’t visit him at King Edward VII’s Hospital as she’s always reluctant to disrupt any hospital’s vital work and knows her presence would put needless pressure on staff.

It means the Queen will have been separated from her husband of 73 years for at least three weeks.

St Bart’s said that while they know it’s difficult for patients and their families, their first responsibility is to the patients they serve, and to maintain their safety and that at all times they need to control visiting.

St Bart’s continued that they’re only allowing visitors in extraordinary circumstances and that they realise that having a family member in hospital is distressing and that they work closely with families and friends to relieve their concerns and find alternative ways of staying in touch.

Buckingham Palace announced on Monday that Philip had been transferred to St Bart’s for continuing treatment for an infection, as well as testing and observation for a pre-existing heart condition.

Although he remains comfortable and responding to treatment, they say, he will remain in hospital until at least the end of the week.

However, Prince Philip hasn’t been well for some time, and not many people get to his age or have the best medical care, and the poor people of the United Kingdom who even reach his age, will ever be afforded the care Prince Philip is getting, and all because he’s a Royal.

There are many people out there praying for Prince Philip, but what about those other thousands of cancer patients, stroke victims and other people, yet people are praying for this over-privileged, extinct man.

No, I don’t dislike the man, I don’t know the man, the same as thousands of other people don’t know this man, and he appears to be somebody special to a lot of people, and I guess it’s not his fault he was born into royalty.

The man is 99 years old. What do people expect him to live another 99 years? But he’s not dead yet, and hopefully, he will pull through because he’s a fighter, but everyone acts like he’s going to live forever.

He’s had a full life, and after all, death is inevitable, none of us gets out alive.

You can be optimistic, but you also have to be realistic. Prince Philip is 99 years old – how long is he supposed to live? He’s not immortal.

LUCKED OUT

A woman has divided opinion online after she bought her nephew a winning lottery ticket – then asked for some of the cash.

The aunt shared her situation on Reddit, explaining she’d fallen on hard times and was living hand to mouth as she tried to pay her bills.

She said that she’d had a tumultuous year and had been laid off from her job and was out of unemployment options.

She said that she does own her own house and manages to scrape by to pay her property taxes and insurance with odd jobs but was eating ramen just about every meal, but as it was her nephew’s birthday earlier in the month, she scraped together some money to get him a present and got the only thing she could afford – lottery tickets.

To her shock, he won a large amount of cash, stating that the second one was actually in the middle five figures, and that it was like life-changing money, but that she couldn’t exactly say how much.

And that while she was happy for her nephew, she explained her sister and her husband were quite well off, and she continued that her nephew has a fully financed college fund and every material thing he could ever want.

After finding out about the win, she got in touch with her sister to ask if her nephew could give her at least three-quarters of the winnings.

The aunt said, her sister asked if she was being serious, and she said that she thought she was being quite reasonable because she needed all of it, and she said that her sister hung up on her, so she decided to text her nephew but she believes he’s blocked her.

She continued to make the case for her position, saying that she needs the money because it was a matter of her eating or not eating and that her nephew isn’t in that situation, and she said, was she the villain for thinking he should share the winning of the gift she gave him?

Her post has racked up hundreds of comments, with some people understanding her position, while others branded her entitled, and one person said that you couldn’t get more entitled and that she shouldn’t get any of his present, regardless of her situation and his.

But a more understanding person commented that they felt sorry for her and that they understood that she was in a terrible financial situation, but that she gave the lottery ticket to her nephew as a present, so it was his and she had no right to it.

There’s an adage, ‘possession is nine-tenths of the law’. She gave him the lottery ticket – therefore his winnings, and he can choose to do whatever he wants with the winnings, and it’s not fair to just demand a cut of it.

It also shows how much he cares about his aunt if he didn’t even offer a portion of it to her, but then you shouldn’t expect money from something you gave to someone else. However, it would have been a kind gesture and the right thing to do, knowing how hard up his aunt is.

But you’ve also got to love how money and material things bring out the best in people – NOT!

And what an awful family this is.

The aunt shouldn’t have asked, but then she shouldn’t have to ask, or perhaps the nephew should have given her a lottery ticket and then said, “There you go, we’re even”.

More Than 50,000 People Call For An Inquiry Into The Use Of Queen’s Consent

More than 50,000 people have called for a parliamentary inquiry into a mysterious mechanism that allows the Queen to vet draft laws before they’re approved by the UK’s elected representatives.

They’ve signed a petition backing an urgent investigation by a House of Commons committee as they’re concerned that the royal family has a disturbing and undemocratic ability to influence the government behind closed doors.

The petition was started following an inquiry by a news outlet into an arcane mechanism known as Queen’s consent.

Under the procedure, ministers are expected to inform the Queen of draft laws that affect her personal property, such as her private estates in Balmoral and Sandringham, and possibly anything considered to affect her personally.

A newspaper outlet revealed how the Queen used the opaque mechanism to lobby for changes in proposed laws that affected her estates and pressed for government policy to be changed.

The paper also discovered documents revealing how the Queen’s representatives lobbied Edward Heath’s government to change a proposed transparency law, allowing her to hide her private wealth from the public.

The Queen’s representatives refused to say how many times she’d requested changes to legislation since she came to the throne in 1952.

The newspaper outlet gathered a database of at least 1,062 parliamentary bills that had been subjected to the antiquated mechanism during the current monarch’s reign, and it highlighted how the procedure had been exercised far more extensively than it was earlier thought.

The petition, organised by the campaigning group 38 Degrees, urges MPs on the public administration and constitutional affairs committee to explore how laws can’t be made without the Queen’s formal consent.

The petition says that it’s incomprehensible that in the 21st century, in a democracy, the Queen and the Prince of Wales hold such great power, and that it may well be a constitutional monarchy in theory, but it seems that the monarchy has a lot of power than many previously believed.

The request for an inquiry has been backed by a Labour MP who sits on the committee, Lloyd Russel-Moyle.

He said it was wrong that the mechanism operated in semi secrecy, and that if the royal household says it’s harmless, then they should let the public see that.

The petition has also been signed by the Labour peer Lord Berkeley, one of the few politicians to have questioned the mechanism in the past.

I guess some might say that the monarchy has been around longer than any politician and that they have more expertise in government than all of them, so why shouldn’t they vet laws that have an impact, especially if that impact is on them.

Well, I suppose that depends on whether you want to live in a democracy or not, and let’s face it, who gave them those powers? And if they’re abusing them for their own self-interests, then they shouldn’t have those powers in the first place.

Or is it that they use those powers to shield Prince Andrew from investigation? And what does the Queen do with that wealth, does she offshore it to someplace else? And her wealth is shameful!

And it would appear that the UK monarchy can veto laws proposed by parliament. Of course, a monarchy with no power would just be some variety of expensive museum exhibit, so one might wonder what is the point of it?

The Queen used the opaque mechanism to lobby for changes in proposed laws that affected her estates, and that’s the exact reason she shouldn’t be allowed to. It’s bad enough politicians exploiting the power we give them without the Queen fleecing the public purse even more.

Prince William Said The Queen Doesn’t Care For Celebrity

William is said to be completely appalled at his younger brother’s decision to take part in a prime time interview with TV talkshow legend Oprah Winfrey, but before this intimate discussion between the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the popular US presenter aired, Harry made a surprise entrance on The Late Late Show.

The US programme is currently hosted by British comic James Corden, a long time friend of Harry’s, and he chose to take the rebellious royal for a bus tour around Los Angeles as they chatted.

The light-hearted nature of the segment, also known as Carpool Karaoke, usually includes guest appearances from former First Lady Michelle Obama to pop star, Lady Gaga.

Subsequently, there was a notable reaction amongst royal watchers to Harry’s trip with James Corden as he swerved away from typical royal behaviour.

While the Queen supposedly told Harry she’s pleased he found happiness in his new life in the US with Meghan and Archie, in a phone call before The Late Late Show aired, she also urged him to continue upholding the monarchy’s values.

Additionally, William once said that his grandmother had no interest in the celebrity element of living in the public eye.

In an interview with author Robert Hardman, the Duke of Cambridge said that the Queen cares not for celebrity, that’s for sure.

Speaking in 2012, he continued that was not what the monarchy’s about – it’s about setting examples, and it’s about doing one’s duty, as the Queen would say.

He said it’s about using their position for the good. It’s about serving their country, and that was the crux of it.

Indeed, the Queen gained extensive applause when she advised the public to follow her lead and accept the COVID 19 vaccine.

Although matters relating to her health normally remain secret, she broke royal tradition by discussing how the jab didn’t hurt at all.

The monarch then addressed a vaccine hesitation and maintained the public ought to think about other people rather than themselves.

This was an astounding intervention from the usually apolitical monarch, but it was overshadowed by Harry’s shock appearance on The Late Late Show.

Insiders even claimed that his appearance created uneasiness at Buckingham Palace, as there’s a tacit understanding amongst royals that the Queen gets precedence when it comes to the spotlight.

The Queen wouldn’t reduce herself to any kind of celebrity coverage, and it appears that Harry has jumped out of the frying pan into the fire, and let’s face it, neither Harry nor Meghan are celebrities, but perhaps secretly Harry always wanted to be some kind of celebrity deep down.

Of course, the Queen is from an older generation, and Harry is young, hip and energetic, and these are two different generations, so it’s a kind of given that Harry would want to go more with the times than to be stuck in the past.

However, here in the United Kingdom, we appear to go along with tradition, loyalty and integrity, the values that our ancestors brought to these shores, and whatever way you look at it, the Queen is ultimately a celebrity, and Harry’s far from stupid.

However, we must remember that she is the Queen, and above tacky celebrities – she’s the Queen of celebrities!

She smiles and waves and her entire mission in life is to be seen, and she’s now 94 years old, and we know nothing about her personality, and we’ve never seen her true persona.

BEGUM’S BELIEF

ISIS bride Shamima Begum may be ready to mount a legal bid to reverse an appeals embargo as she continues to fight to be allowed back into the United Kingdom.

Shamima Begum was defeated yesterday in her legal fight to return for a court appeal over the stripping of her British citizenship, but Government sources understand her lawyers may seek to challenge this.

The highest court in the land yesterday delivered a stinging rebuff to the Court of Appeal, which last year cleared the way for Shamima Begum to come back to Britain after discovering she was refused a fair and effective appeal.

But Lord Reed, the president of the Supreme Court, ordered the appeal process should be delayed until Shamima Begum was in a position to play an effective part in it without the safety of the public being endangered.

This means that Shamima Begum is set to languish in the fetid al-Roj camp under the guard of the Syrian Democratic Forces, who are said to forbid contact with lawyers. However, a news outlet reported that Government sources fear she may start a legal bid to force Britain to facilitate a court hearing that would be held remotely from the camp.

A source said that her appeal over her citizenship is in limbo until she can appear at a hearing.

The source said that they believe her lawyers will probably attempt to demonstrate that the Government has to provide the facilities to allow such a hearing to happen, but the reality is that she’s in a camp in northeast Syria which is very dangerous and has probably not got great phone reception, so how could they facilitate it?

According to a source, another way she could challenge yesterday’s Supreme court appeal embargo would be to take her case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Shamima Begum, wearing sunglasses, leggings and white trainers, declined to comment to reporters at the al-Roj refugee camp in Syria following yesterday’s decision.

The 21-year-old was said to have been in tears in her tent following the decision, and Mamdoh Abdalla, a Kurdish translator at the camp said she was furious and wept after getting the news.

She continued that Shamima did not talk to them, was in her tent, and that she did not talk to anyone or any other reporter.

The Supreme Court collectively ruled in favour of the Government and said Shamima Begum could not come back to the United Kingdom for a court case to reclaim her British passport for the safety of the public.

Not many people would feel safe if this young woman was to come back to the United Kingdom. However, we have a huge knife crime problem in the United Kingdom, and many are youths that are being enticed and groomed into joining gangs of one sort or another.

These gangs are perpetrating terrible offences, should they also have their citizenship removed and shipped off somewhere?

As a UK citizen Shamima Begum is entitled to legal aid until she’s been officially rubber-stamped that she’s no longer a UK citizen, then until that time, she’s entitled, and she will probably win in the end because the law states that she can’t remain stateless.

If she’s forced to return, then potentially it’s a death sentence, and legally we can’t allow that because if we did, then that would only make us as bad as she’s been, and if she’s allowed her citizenship back and returns to the United Kingdom, then a prison sentence for her punishment because you can never tell if she’s reformed or not.

A Culture War Has Been Fermenting At The Capitol For Years

Guns, masks and conspiracy theories. These have been controversial issues brewing for months, and even years, between political parties and legislators that now seem to be at boiling point on Capitol Hill.

Tensions in Congress have been high in the past, but the rhetoric of the last few months is not business as usual.

Julian Zelizer, a professor of political history at Princeton University, told USA Today the current climate is one of the bad moments in American history.

Compared to the days before the Civil War, in the 19th century, and the 1960s, Julian Zelizer said, today is at least like those, and in some ways, it’s worse. Though members may not be attacking each other physically as they did in the 19th century, sometimes it feels like they’re getting close.

Now, points of contention have appeared to have reached a crescendo, and have been magnified by the Capitol riot, and here are some of the problems that have legislators angrier with one another now than in recent history.

The 117th Congress brought in a new set of legislators, including some linked to right-wing fringe movements, including the QAnon conspiracy movement, which baselessly claims a deep state cabal of paedophiles tried to bring down Donald Trump, amongst others.

Representatives Lauren Boebert of Colorado and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia are two of the rookie legislators most known for supporting QAnon ideas.

Taylor Greene has been a particular cracking point on Capitol Hill over the tolerance of conspiracy theories and the discourse that frequently accompanies them.

The Democratic-led House last month voted principally along party lines to remove Taylor Greene from her two committees for a litany of incendiary, conspiratorial and menacing social media posts before she was elected, which included questioning whether the 9/11 terrorist attacks ever happened, stalking and taunting a teen survivor of the bloody Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, and implying that space lasers were causing lethal wildfires in California.

The floor debate over Taylor Greene, in a chamber already motivated by division and distrust, turned bleak as House members took turns arguing not just about Greene’s particular conduct but what it said about House members who demanded or opposed her punishment.

On top of QAnon and other right-wing extremist beliefs, 147 congressional Republicans expedited misleading claims that Donald Trump won the presidential election and voted to not accept election results in Arizona and Pennsylvania.

But this is what happens when othering and demonisation become the norm. When the extremes on each end of the political rainbow silence the moderate voices in the middle.

It’s the fault of both sides, and there’s no way back but for the moderate voices in both parties to reclaim the centre, and it wouldn’t be so sad if they didn’t act like bitter, pretentious high schoolers, all belonging to their own clicks and behaving literally like spiteful children.

They all just act like attention seekers, go-getters, narcissists, seekers to condemn others and not taking a serious role in what they’re there to do, and it makes me question how these cult members get elected into Congress.

And I do not doubt that there are numerous in the closet in Congress who are at the point of coming out of the cupboard.

They’re a pretty reckless bunch of people who will end up doing more harm than good for the American people, and the fence needs to be taken down as quickly as possible because if they can’t protect their people, then they shouldn’t be protected either.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started