Trump’s funniest year as president was his first imo. Sean Spicer hiding in the bushes, Trump’s nonsensical lies about the size of his inauguration crowd, the EU president using simplified colored cards to explain trade to Trump, Scaramucci’s 1 week as spokes person, the still liberal Washington post counting all Trump’s lies, … Trump’s first year was farcical comedy, but nowadays it’s a lot more horror than comedy imo.
A bit nitpicky, but that would more correctly be referred to as the EC president. There’s also the CEU president (Council of EU) which is more akin to a president of EU (which is also technically wrong).
My point is, the structure of the EU is more complicated than republics and there is no real “president” of the EU, which makes that term quite vague and potentially misleading.
It’s a vague recollection of something that happened almost 10 years ago. These are passing comments, not facts in a scientific article. If the comment is sufficiently accurate that it can be used to find back the event that I’m referring to, then it’s good enough imo. I believe in cutting people some slack, myself included.
Trump’s funniest year as president was his first imo. Sean Spicer hiding in the bushes, Trump’s nonsensical lies about the size of his inauguration crowd, the EU president using simplified colored cards to explain trade to Trump, Scaramucci’s 1 week as spokes person, the still liberal Washington post counting all Trump’s lies, … Trump’s first year was farcical comedy, but nowadays it’s a lot more horror than comedy imo.
There is no “eu president”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_European_Commission this one
A bit nitpicky, but that would more correctly be referred to as the EC president. There’s also the CEU president (Council of EU) which is more akin to a president of EU (which is also technically wrong).
My point is, the structure of the EU is more complicated than republics and there is no real “president” of the EU, which makes that term quite vague and potentially misleading.
It’s a vague recollection of something that happened almost 10 years ago. These are passing comments, not facts in a scientific article. If the comment is sufficiently accurate that it can be used to find back the event that I’m referring to, then it’s good enough imo. I believe in cutting people some slack, myself included.