Absolutely. If the BBC uses its considerable power wisely then Trump will come to regret this.
As defendant in a criminal trial he would have been cosily innocent until proven guilty, but as plaintiff in a civil trial he has to do the proving, guilty until proven innocent... and if he can't?

When Oscar Wilde sued for libel he ended up in prison, having inadvertently revealed the evidence needed to convict him. Let's hope Trump tries the same thing. Why on earth did the BBC apologise?

I know what the words say, but also their spirit and intention in the context of the game. What advantage did Beaumont seek to gain? None. Without that the word "wilfully" becomes moot.

Cricket has no law against kicking the ball. In order to be obstruction something must have been obstructed, but what? No wicket-taking opportunity, no attempt to take another run. It's a total non-event, but appalling bad faith from a fielding side reduced to desperate tricks.

Thelma, Louise, Donald and JD

Who's "we"? The Tory party elected her, not the UK electorate. "We" wouldn't be that dumb.

True, but everything ultimately comes from a point of view, whether it be that of an individual news reporter, managing editors, the DG of the BBC, or Ofcom. There's no such thing as an objective middle point, so its folly to waste too much time chasing "balance".

First history lesson of term, teacher burst into room and performed a series of increasingly bizarre acts (jumped out of window, whooped like a savage, misquoted Shakespeare, etc etc), then asked class to write it all down. Nobody could agree on what had just happened. Brilliant and insightful.

Most efficacious in every case!

Pope keeps getting the nod because he's a "good team man" who everyone likes and he always volunteers no matter how tough the job. Not sure that's a good basis for Test selection though...