BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Pross wrote:Alejandrosdog wrote:Rees Mog is angry that the thickos in the supreme court have got it wrong and has called it a constitutional coup. Playing to the rabble rather than facts.
Id like to burn him alive in parliament square but sadly he will carry on as normal.
JUST GET BREXIT SORTED BUT DO IT LEGALY
I don't understand the claim that the Court are getting involved in politics. Someone raised a case through the Courts about the lawfulness of the decision which was then appealed to the Supreme Court. Surely they were obliged to hear the case and the fact that it was a unanimous decision that it was unlawful suggests that there were strong reasons for determining as they did? If it was a close decision I could perhaps understand the decision but given how much lawyers like to argue over points of law the decision seems pretty unequivocal. Also, the judges are appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of the Prime Minister. Of the 11, 3 were appointed when Cameron was PM and 6 when May was PM with the other 2 remaining from Gordon Brown's time so over half were appointed since the last General Election during a Tory government.
Rees Mog is clever but not clever enough to know when he's not clever enough. In any case this only serves as an opportunity to get the thick up and down the country to be outraged at the courts interference with their voting rights. How dare they etc etc.
The issue comes when morons like mog undermine peoples trust in the legal system and the Rule of Law is undermined. He's a tool.0 -
TheBigBean wrote:Geoffrey Cox wrote:But the time is coming, the time is coming Mr Speaker, when even these turkeys won’t be able to prevent Christmas.
This was theme to his answers to various questions. He is good orator whether you agree with him or not.0 -
Still, Brexiteers wanted parliament to take back control; now they have and they don't like it up 'em.
0 -
TheBigBean wrote:TheBigBean wrote:Geoffrey Cox wrote:But the time is coming, the time is coming Mr Speaker, when even these turkeys won’t be able to prevent Christmas.
This was theme to his answers to various questions. He is good orator whether you agree with him or not.
You think?
Most professional commentators seem to think he’s making a fool of himself.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:TheBigBean wrote:TheBigBean wrote:Geoffrey Cox wrote:But the time is coming, the time is coming Mr Speaker, when even these turkeys won’t be able to prevent Christmas.
This was theme to his answers to various questions. He is good orator whether you agree with him or not.
You think?
Most professional commentators seem to think he’s making a fool of himself.
Yes, so is Bercow. Who thinks he isn't? Perhaps they need to be forced to listen to any number of other public speakers.0 -
Alejandrosdog wrote:Rees Mog is angry that the thickos in the supreme court have got it wrong and has called it a constitutional coup. Playing to the rabble rather than facts.
Completely agree with you here, this is a dangerous game.Alejandrosdog wrote:Rees Mog is clever but not clever enough to know when he's not clever enough. In any case this only serves as an opportunity to get the thick up and down the country to be outraged at the courts interference with their voting rights. How dare they etc etc.
The issue comes when morons like mog undermine peoples trust in the legal system and the Rule of Law is undermined. He's a tool.0 -
TheBigBean wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:TheBigBean wrote:TheBigBean wrote:Geoffrey Cox wrote:But the time is coming, the time is coming Mr Speaker, when even these turkeys won’t be able to prevent Christmas.
This was theme to his answers to various questions. He is good orator whether you agree with him or not.
You think?
Most professional commentators seem to think he’s making a fool of himself.
Yes, so is Bercow. Who thinks he isn't? Perhaps they need to be forced to listen to any number of other public speakers.
Yes Cox speaks very well, the pace, the clarity, the intonation and use of language are all excellent. his performance is what you would expect from a good barrister.
Naturally since this is politics there are many willing to rubbish the man for any number reasons but that doesn't erase the skills and aptitude he demonstrates at the dispatch box. I think he'd make a good PM0 -
TheBigBean wrote:TheBigBean wrote:Geoffrey Cox wrote:But the time is coming, the time is coming Mr Speaker, when even these turkeys won’t be able to prevent Christmas.
This was theme to his answers to various questions. He is good orator whether you agree with him or not.
Much as I'd like to remain I agree with him to an extent that the most likely scenario is we will leave in some way and really MPs on all sides should be working to come up with an agreeable solution to get a deal that will result in the minimum possible impact rather going to the extremes of pushing for no deal or continuing to hope that Brexit can be stalled and ultimately cancelled.0 -
TailWindHome wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Do you think that Bettels actions were appropriate for an EU head of state?
I don't think they were inappropriate.
Then I remember Margaret Thatcher doing a walk about and answering press questions on Royal Avenue, Belfast at the high of the Troubles not running from a group of British ex pats.
Oddly footage of Thatcher's walk about has just come up on my Twitter feed.
https://twitter.com/BBCSpotlightNI/stat ... 7481791488“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Lots of bluster but no substance coming from opposition MP's. The longer they deny the electorate an election the worse the answer is going to be for them.
The politicisation of the Supreme Court will in hindsight be seen as a massive remain own goal, as all it has done is increased the turnout for the 2 Leave parties. I am going to enjoy Remains day of reckoning
0 -
Pross wrote:TheBigBean wrote:TheBigBean wrote:Geoffrey Cox wrote:But the time is coming, the time is coming Mr Speaker, when even these turkeys won’t be able to prevent Christmas.
This was theme to his answers to various questions. He is good orator whether you agree with him or not.
Much as I'd like to remain I agree with him to an extent that the most likely scenario is we will leave in some way and really MPs on all sides should be working to come up with an agreeable solution to get a deal that will result in the minimum possible impact rather going to the extremes of pushing for no deal or continuing to hope that Brexit can be stalled and ultimately cancelled.
Obviously it goes without saying that no blame falls on the members for Uxbridge and NE Somerset, etc. in the failure of attempts to get a deal through. Cox is very well spoken but that doesn't cover the gaping hole in his argument1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Hang on, I thought we didn't need any more votes as the Will of the People has already been cast in stone?Coopster the 1st wrote:The longer they deny the electorate an election the worse the answer is going to be for them.0 -
I reckon Coopster is most easily indoctrinated human on the planet. He appears to soak up and regurgitate at every opportunity anything the chief Brexiteers spout (politicisation of the judiciary being the current favourite). Talk about gullible, no doubt there's a 'Nigerian prince' walking around with his life's savings somewhere.0
-
Coopster the 1st wrote:The longer they deny the electorate an election the worse the answer is going to be for them.
I fail to see how an election would sort out Brexit. You could have a government comprising God and all of his Angels and you'd still not sort out the Irish Border problem.
Are you getting the Brexit you were promised ?0 -
I've no idea why people keep on replying to him.Pross wrote:I reckon Coopster is most easily indoctrinated human on the planet. He appears to soak up and regurgitate at every opportunity anything the chief Brexiteers spout (politicisation of the judiciary being the current favourite). Talk about gullible, no doubt there's a 'Nigerian prince' walking around with his life's savings somewhere.0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:The politicisation of the Supreme Court will in hindsight be seen as a massive remain own goal, as all it has done is increased the turnout for the 2 Leave parties. I am going to enjoy Remains day of reckoning
You are an idiot.0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:Lots of bluster but no substance coming from opposition MP's. The longer they deny the electorate an election the worse the answer is going to be for them.
The politicisation of the Supreme Court will in hindsight be seen as a massive remain own goal, as all it has done is increased the turnout for the 2 Leave parties. I am going to enjoy Remains day of reckoning You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.0 -
briantrumpet wrote:
I've no idea why people keep on replying to him.Pross wrote:I reckon Coopster is most easily indoctrinated human on the planet. He appears to soak up and regurgitate at every opportunity anything the chief Brexiteers spout (politicisation of the judiciary being the current favourite). Talk about gullible, no doubt there's a 'Nigerian prince' walking around with his life's savings somewhere.
A sense of duty to non-idiots. (That is if he is genuinely an idiot and not just a troll).0 -
Johnson's speech to the UN was quite something“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
David Allen Green's take on this was that prorogation needs to be put on a solid legal footing in future. It is one of the few things the executive can do unilaterally with no check to stop parliament sitting - both the other ways (recesses and dissolution before a GE since the FTPA) have supporting legislation behind them. Whereas prorogation can occur basically on the PM's whim.Ballysmate wrote:Regardless of where you sit politically or regarding BJ, yesterday's judgement throws our Constitution into the limelight for those that are interested.
eg
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/09 ... vereignty/
I accept that some/most will find it a bit dry.
A key thing in the SC's judgement was that 5 weeks is unusually long compared to the normal one or two weeks - I think if he had been less greedy it might have gone through.0 -
briantrumpet wrote:
I've no idea why people keep on replying to him.Pross wrote:I reckon Coopster is most easily indoctrinated human on the planet. He appears to soak up and regurgitate at every opportunity anything the chief Brexiteers spout (politicisation of the judiciary being the current favourite). Talk about gullible, no doubt there's a 'Nigerian prince' walking around with his life's savings somewhere.
It's like picking at a scab, you just can't help yourself sometimes even though you know it's not sensible.0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:
David Allen Green's take on this was that prorogation needs to be put on a solid legal footing in future. It is one of the few things the executive can do unilaterally with no check to stop parliament sitting - both the other ways (recesses and dissolution before a GE since the FTPA) have supporting legislation behind them. Whereas prorogation can occur basically on the PM's whim.Ballysmate wrote:Regardless of where you sit politically or regarding BJ, yesterday's judgement throws our Constitution into the limelight for those that are interested.
eg
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/09 ... vereignty/
I accept that some/most will find it a bit dry.
A key thing in the SC's judgement was that 5 weeks is unusually long compared to the normal one or two weeks - I think if he had been less greedy it might have gone through.
If he'd given any kind of reason why it was appropriate it might have got through. There must have been any number of reasonable reasons he could have used and whilst they might have been tested it could have been very different. Obviously being entirely transparent would not have helped lolol0 -
The reason it hasn't been is because our system is reliant on the the PM not abusing their position and up until now, even though we may have questioned their character, they have not done so.bobmcstuff wrote:
David Allen Green's take on this was that prorogation needs to be put on a solid legal footing in future. It is one of the few things the executive can do unilaterally with no check to stop parliament sitting - both the other ways (recesses and dissolution before a GE since the FTPA) have supporting legislation behind them. Whereas prorogation can occur basically on the PM's whim.Ballysmate wrote:Regardless of where you sit politically or regarding BJ, yesterday's judgement throws our Constitution into the limelight for those that are interested.
eg
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/09 ... vereignty/
I accept that some/most will find it a bit dry.
A key thing in the SC's judgement was that 5 weeks is unusually long compared to the normal one or two weeks - I think if he had been less greedy it might have gone through.
BJ has overstepped the mark and defied convention.0 -
TailWindHome wrote:Johnson's speech to the UN was quite something
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -in-quotes
Is this real?0 -
Michael Gove on the Today programme this morning, denied that they tried to mislead parliament and the queen. Said the only reason they prorogued parliament was for the queens speech to progress their domestic agenda.
He was repeatedly asked if they would apologise for misleading parliament, the queen and the people, he finally said in his closing remarks that they would not apologise for trying to implement their domestic agenda and would not apologise for trying to progress with Brexit...
err, hand on. Did you not just admit in that remark that one of the reasons you prorogued parliament was to get Brexit through??? Sadly the interview finished there and the interviewer did not pick up on that.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Johnson's speech to the UN was quite something
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -in-quotes
Is this real?
Er ... Does he use Trump's speech writer? Oh, no, sorry - wrong subject - he's talking about everyone else, not about himself... perhaps they just went to the same school ..0 -
Looking at politics all round the world, you have to wonder if the "legalise drugs" campaigners have gained more traction than we thoughtSlowbike wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Johnson's speech to the UN was quite something
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -in-quotes
Is this real?
Er ... Does he use Trump's speech writer? Oh, no, sorry - wrong subject - he's talking about everyone else, not about himself... perhaps they just went to the same school ..0 -
Slowbike wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Johnson's speech to the UN was quite something
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -in-quotes
Is this real?
Er ... Does he use Trump's speech writer? Oh, no, sorry - wrong subject - he's talking about everyone else, not about himself... perhaps they just went to the same school ..
Trump at Eton - could be the new Caddyshack.0 -
Mark Devenport
@markdevenport
· 30m
. @eastantrimmp raises concern about UK's one way tariff plan in immediate aftermath of no deal Brexit, saying this will disadvantage NI businesses & put no pressure on Irish govt. @michaelgove says UK wants a deal so mitigations aren't required
The penny starts to drop with the DUP.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Slowbike wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Johnson's speech to the UN was quite something
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -in-quotes
Is this real?
Er ... Does he use Trump's speech writer? Oh, no, sorry - wrong subject - he's talking about everyone else, not about himself... perhaps they just went to the same school ..
I somehow doubt Trump would be making analogies with Prometheus.0
