monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

A US singer has filed a sexual assault claim against President Donald Trump's former campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski.

Joy Villa says Mr Lewandowski hit her twice on the backside during an event in Washington last month.

She told the US media she spoke to the police on Christmas Eve, having been persuaded to launch a formal complaint by friends.

Mr Lewandowski has not responded to US media's requests for comment.

The accusations are the latest in a long line of sexual harassment and assault claims linked to celebrities, politicians and companies, which have gathered pace in the past year, particularly following the downfall of film mogul Harvey Weinstein.

"I was initially fearful to come forward with this," she said, according to the Associated Press news agency. She said she did not want to embarrass Mr Lewandowski's family or hers.

Ms Villa, who is a vocal Trump supporter and wore a "Make America Great Again" dress to the 2017 Grammy Awards, was at a gathering at Trump International Hotel when she posed for a photograph with Mr Lewandowski, whom, she says, she had never met before.

She alleges he hit her once on the buttocks, and when she asked him to stop and joked about reporting him for sexual harassment, he did it again. She said he laughed, adding "I work in the private sector".

She said the hard slaps felt "disgusting and shocking and demeaning".

News site Politico first reported on the incident last week, saying they had talked to a witness who spoke out before she did.

Ms Villa has previously said she is considering running for Congress - and President Trump has tweeted his support.

Mr Trump fired Mr Lewandowski as campaign manager in June 2016.

Earlier last year, he was charged with battery after allegedly yanking a female reporter out of Mr Trump's way after a campaign event. The charges were later dropped.

A senior Church of England bishop has lambasted conservative evangelical Christians in the US for their “uncritical support” of Donald Trump, urging them to reflect on how their endorsement of the president relates to their faith.

Paul Bayes, the bishop of Liverpool, said “self-styled evangelicals” risked bringing the word evangelical into disrepute, and added there was no justification for Christians contradicting God’s teaching to protect the poor and the weak.

Bayes told the Guardian: “Some of the things that have been said by religious leaders seem to collude with a system that marginalises the poor, a system which builds walls instead of bridges, a system which says people on the margins of society should be excluded, a system which says we’re not welcoming people any more into our country.
“Whenever people say those kinds of things, they need to be able to justify that they’re saying those things as Christians, and I do not believe it’s justifiable.”

He said he regretted that “people who call themselves evangelical in the US seem to be uncritically accepting” positions taken by Trump and his allies.

“Some quite significant so-called evangelical leaders are uncritically supporting people in ways that imply they are colluding or playing down the seriousness of things which in other parts of their lives [they] would see as really important,” Bayes added.

He stressed that not all evangelicals were Trump supporters, saying there were “many, many Christians who are trying to proclaim the gospel as we’ve received it, even if that means political leaders have to be challenged”.

Last month, Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, said he could not comprehend the strength of support for Trump among conservative evangelicals in the US. “I really genuinely do not understand where that is coming from,” he told ITV’s Peston on Sunday programme.

In his Christmas Day sermon at Canterbury Cathedral, Welby criticised “populist leaders that deceive” their people, in comments interpreted as being aimed at Trump.

According to the Washington-based Pew Research Center, 80% of self-identified white evangelical Christians said they voted for Trump in the 2016 election, and three-quarters have since said they approve of his presidency.

Bayes, who has been bishop of Liverpool since 2014, said: “If people want to support rightwing populism anywhere in the world, they are free to do so. The question is, how are they going to relate that to their Christian faith?

“And if what I believe are the clear teachings of the gospel about love for all, the desire for justice and for making sure marginalised and defenceless people are protected, if it looks as though those teachings are being contradicted, then I think there is a need to say so.”

Bayes was speaking to mark the launch of a new Christian charity, which he is chairing, aimed at eliminating discrimination based on sexuality or gender.

The Ozanne Foundation will work with religious organisations around the world on LGBTI, gender and sexuality issues, as well as conflict resolution and education. It will be led by Jayne Ozanne, a prominent campaigner for equality within the C of E. Along with Bayes, the charity’s trustees and advisers include David Ison, the dean of St Paul’s Cathedral, Jeffrey John, the dean of St Albans, and Martyn Percy, the dean of Christ Church, Oxford.

They cannot operate with a structural deficit. The federal government can.

Are you always this simple?

How does a state or municipality declare bankruptcy, if they can't operate with a deficit?

I said they cannot operate with a structural deficit.

“There are few people who are more often in the wrong than those who cannot bear to be so.”

Don't they raise taxes or cut spending to avoid operating with a structural deficit?

Hence bankruptcy.

It's not as if a structural deficit can simply be ignored.

Quote:

Hence bankruptcy.

Which means that the debt payments are restructured to bring receipts and expenditures into balance, right? The fact that the municipality must declare bankruptcy is precisely my point. It's not as if a structural deficit can simply be ignored.

The fact that the municipality must declare bankruptcy is precisely my point. It's not as if a structural deficit can simply be ignored.

You're choosing to drag this out for what reason, Hi?

This makes no sense:
"The fact that the municipality must declare bankruptcy is precisely my point. It's not as if a structural deficit can simply be ignored."

I can tell you all day long that, for your own best interests, you "shouldn't" do something.

But that in no way affects what you "can" do.