Dave

@_ElliottJackson Another incredible save we have to extend his contract ASAP

Off the bar! Massive chance for West Brom as Heggebo hits the bar from close range. Think Toth got a touch. #Rovers🌹 lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/25995511…

@TrueHoop Where does Kon rank?

The NBA is the hardest league in the world. Rookies almost never make good teams better. Cooper Flagg might be Rookie of the Year as the 222nd most productive player. My genius partner CoachThorpe shows, with game footage, some of what’s hard to learn. truehoop.com/p/rookies-almo…

@SE_Steve10 @Jaack Ed Davey? 😂

UK people… who would be your 4 UK legends on your own personal Mount Rushmore? Here are my four: Bob Mortimer Wayne Mardle Claudia Winkleman Sean Lock

@Vindog56 I hope you get a Sox season you deserve 💪

"The best anyone grieving can do is learn how to carry it, and I’m still learning..." Everybody Cries. Everybody Hurts, Sometimes... s.barstool.link/c/article-3565…

@stugotz790 @NULax Your hands look like @gregcote Big toe

Proud of you Rach. Thank you for distracting me from the Jets for the past 4 years. 💜

@reluctantnicko I thought the batters was decent enough The bowling was the problem no decent 2nd seemer don’t trust Curran or Overton to bowl enough Yorkers

@BenWallace70 @DXW_KC The point is that “what he actually believes” does not apply to this PM. Starmer has demonstrated repeatedly that his decisions are based on what he is told by advisers (usually wrongly) is political expediency. They are not underpinned by any convictions whatsoever.

@BenWallace70 @DXW_KC Do you we really want Starmer coming out either way? He has an uncanny knack of picking the wrong side.

I don’t believe there was a legal barrier to the UK enabling or assisting the US strikes. I think under International law it was possible. In stead of hiding behind ambiguous legal advice the PM should show leadership by making the case for what he actually believes. Until this happens none of us can have any confidence about our security. We can agree or disagree but we do need a clear foreign policy from No.10

I disagree with Lord Hermer KC, the Attorney General. I don’t accept that international law requires our Prime Minister to deliver a pusillanimous statement setting out the UK’s position whose first point is “We did not participate”. I’ve set out the gist of my approach below. ⬇️   The Prime Minister has refused publicly to support the US and Israel strikes, and also refuses to allow the US to use UK bases, because of international law advice he has reportedly received from Lord Hermer.   International law ought to provide a mechanism to restrain and, if necessary, end despotic and tyrannical regimes such as that in Iran. If the doctrines of international law prove unable to restrain Iranian terrorism and mass murder, and tie the hands of democracies while forcing them to stand and watch Iranian atrocities, international law will have failed. It will have become a fundamentally immoral system of law, and one which is worse than worthless in the modern world.   To be clear: I don’t believe that it is. I think international law is important, and both can and should provide a just legal order. I do, however, have serious questions as to the moral attitudes of some of its expositors; too many international lawyers serenely promote an analysis which ultimately protects tyrants.   Seven points, and some questions:   1 The inherent right to use force in the face of an imminent attack from a hostile nation which is responsible for a pattern of hostile actions exists for good reason: a country cannot be expected to remain idle and just wait for the next attack.   2 Iran has repeatedly threatened to attack the UK’s bases and personnel. Those threats come in the context of persistent Iranian attempts to launch attacks on UK soil, too; the Director General of MI5 has stated, and the PM confirmed last night, that the UK has responded to tens of Iranian-backed plots, presenting potentially lethal threats to British citizens and UK residents. There is also a constant barrage of cyberattacks; while not all cyberattacks are armed attacks in sense of Article 51 of the UN Charter, some may be, and all confirm not just hostile intent but action pursuant to such intent.   3 The UK’s long-standing allies, the US and Israel, were right to consider that they faced further attacks prior to their recent military action, given that (i) Iran has previously attacked both states directly and also through its many proxies; (ii) Iran has repeatedly stated its intent to destroy Israel; (iii) Iran was assessed to be on the brink of acquiring a nuclear capability with uranium enrichment at 60% (which can only be for military use); and (iv) Iran already possessed – as demonstrated by its recent attacks – a sophisticated and effective long-range delivery capability which Israel cannot fully neutralise with defensive weapons.   4 The acquisition of a nuclear capability by Iran represents a genocidal risk for Israel and its people. Iran’s repeatedly stated aim is to wipe the State of Israel, and its inhabitants, off the face of the earth. The slogan of the proxies through which Iran has often attacked Israel is: “God is greater, death to America, death to Israel, curse to the Jews, victory to Islam”. In these circumstances, whether they are characterised as part of an ongoing armed conflict with Iran or as a new use of force based on self-defence, Israel’s actions are justifiable.   5 The UK (and also the US) is permitted under international law to use force to aid another state which is acting in self-defence. Moreover, the UK is under an obligation in international law is to prevent genocide, not just to stop it: stopping an on-going genocide is required, but it necessarily means that action was taken too late. 1/2

@DavidPSamson Good luck

Ready for Tokyo marathon to start. Goal is to finish. One step at a time. #waittosee

• Israel strikes Iran (done) • Iran retaliates with drones/missiles • Israel/US intercepts, strikes back harder • Strait of Hormuz threatened, oil spikes • US fully drawn in • Regional proxies activate • Ceasefire talks begin when both sides exhausted • Nothing resolved. Repeat every 18 months until regime toppled.

@_ElliottJackson They need to just keep it their end for a bit. regain our composure.

That's a let-off. Long ball causes issues for McLoughlin and Riis pokes it at goal but Toth turns it away.  Would've been a really soft one to give away. #Rovers lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/25878681…

@reluctantnicko What u make Rovers Al? All the concern about job share overblown seem completely overblown. Does he have interest in rovers long term?

@skynewsniall Bravo you fellas got it sown up already

Like seriously don’t say anything

Nobody say a THING

@helena_brown @afneil Mandelson was in for 30

@afneil She might have been a bit of a shite PM, but to be fair she was in front line politics for over a decade. There is something in that

Theresa May a ‘trail-blazing leader’??!! Almost choked with laughter on my coffee and toast …

@SocialMediaTWTR @Giannis_An34 What a weird way to present stats

@Giannis_An34 Maybe true…but, making free throws will help the cause.

Legends don’t chase. They attract 💯😎

@ChrisCu63115001 @JManadon @afneil I’m surprised he has been found hanging already.

@JManadon @afneil Either that or “suicide”

Monologue from today’s Times at One with Andrew Neil: BETRAYAL And still the revelations about Peter Mandleson’s betrayals from the heart of government come, each one more jaw-dropping than the last.  We learned earlier this week that he’d tipped off his convicted pedophile mate about an imminent €500bn bailout of the Eurozone, advance information hugely useful to a financial fixer like Jeffrey Epstein.  Even more incredibly, we saw how he’d advised America’s most powerful banker, via Epstein, to threaten the British government over plans to tax bankers’ bonuses in the wake of the Great Financial Crash, caused by said bankers.  Which the powerful banker then did in an intimidating call to then Chancellor Alastair Darling. A call inspired by the government’s very own business secretary, one Peter Mandleson.  Now we learn that the moment Mandleson was given a note about a highly sensitive meeting between Darling and then US Treasury secretary Larry Summers in March 2010, our business secretary had whisked it to Epstein within five minutes. That’s right. Five. Minutes.  Mandleson then received a second confidential note on the Darling-Summers exchanges. It took him only two minutes to send that to his pedo mate.  The reality is that Epstein had his very own mole at the heart of the British government, sending him secret and confidential information which could profit Epstein and his billionaire banker friends. And that mole was our business secretary.  He even tipped Epstein off about the state of talks between Britain and America over a £10bn aerospace contract to provide the RAF with air-to-air refuelling tankers.  At one stage Mandleson opines to Epstein that the then PM needs to be confined to a sanatorium. Remember Mandleson is saying this of the man who’d revived his political career. It doesn’t get much lower than that. No wonder Brown is seething. Let’s be blunt: the evidence is compelling that Mandleson betrayed himself, his department, his PM, his government, his country.  And let us not forget Mandleson had previously been bunged $75,000 by Epstein. He says he has no recollection of such payments though the bank statements are clear for all to see. But, hey, who hasn’t forgotten a $75,000 gift? Mandleson’s partner also had his snout in the trough. We now learn he received three payments of £4,000 each from Epstein — this on top of £10,000 to take a course in osteopathy. Of course for Epstein it was all chicken feed. He must have been laughing all the way to his insider dealing.  Whether it’s for misconduct in public office, breaching the official secrets act or dealing in insider information, it’s only right that his former lordship be the subject of the most rigorous criminal investigation. And quickly. This should not be allowed to drag on.  But Keir Starmer has almost as many questions to answer as Mandleson. Just how was it that such a snake ended up as our man in Washington? Starmer didn’t know what we now know about Mandleson. But he knew a lot. In a faltering performance at PMQs he’s just admitted he did know of Mandleson’s ongoing relationship with Epstein. But he still appointed him anyway.  Starmer now claims Mandleson lied and lied to him. But my understanding is that Mandleson was never properly quizzed about his links with Epstein, so anxious was Starmer and his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, to shoe-horn him into our palatial embassy on Massachusetts Avenue.  The push is on in Parliament today for the government to reveal all the details of the vetting of Peter Mandleson.  At times like this the default of British governments is to stonewall. But if Starmer truly regrets his Mandleson appointment, which has turned into a political catastrophe for him, he will sanction full disclosure of all relevant material, including who was involved in pressing Mandleson’s appointment.  Nothing less will suffice in what has become the greatest political scandal of our age.

@TrueHoop @PabloTorre

Josh Harris, one of the most famous billionaires in sports, appears more than 500 times in the Epstein files. I just read them all and here's what I found. truehoop.com/p/when-josh-ha…

@ProFootballTalk @DavidPSamson I need to hear you rip this badly 😂 what’s the over under on games he lasts from here?

Joe Schoen: Final say is just something on a piece of paper, it doesn't matter. nbcsports.com/nfl/profootbal…

The numbers speak for themselves… but for @TheDividendFund, the best bit is seeing so many of you copy his portfolio and become part of his community. Your eToro Recap is ready in the app… check it out and share your year.

@TicketmasterCS hi I can’t find my tickets for Glasgow vs Edinburgh rugby I think I put my email address in wrong when I bought them can you help me?