Brexiteers desperate last bid: suspend Parliament so it can't have a say

The trolling continues.

Who or what is trolling, r1?

R1 was referring to himself. He continues trolling.

Taking back control, really?

Those old, white racists that OP mentioned? R1 is the posterboy.

But since he can't actually refute what is being said, he's reduced to pathetic, unimaginative, uninspired name calling.

Sad.

I have never ever been more ashamed of my country in my lifetime.

Maybe R1 meant the Tories were trolling? Otherwise their comment doesn't make any sense.

[quote]The government has asked the Queen to suspend Parliament just days after MPs return to work in September - and only a few weeks before the Brexit deadline.

[quote]Boris Johnson said a Queen's Speech would take place after the suspension, on 14 October, to outline his "very exciting agenda".

Jesus. Surely the Queen wouldn't agree to any of this, right?

Can someone trigger a confidence motion before she decides?

[quote]Those old, white racists that OP mentioned? [R1] is the posterboy. But since he can't actually refute what is being said, he's reduced to pathetic, unimaginative, uninspired name calling.

OP mentioned? You are the OP.

[quote] But since he can't actually refute what is being said, he's reduced to pathetic, unimaginative, uninspired name calling.

Exactly what you're doing...typical..."racist" - "white"...zzzzzzzz....

You're a moron and like all morons, you can't shut the fuck up with your "pathetic, unimaginative, uninspired name calling".

God R10 what a devastating comeback: witty, to the point, subtle, addressing all the issues with your rapier intelligence.

They tremble in fear when you enter the room, women swoon, men avert their gazes.

A giant of your time.

It was a referendum, not an opinion poll. To ignore it would be as damaging as any other harmful course of action. If the EU's where the UK should be, there is absolutely nothing to stop a political party from running in a general election on a platform of rejoining.

"Jesus. Surely the Queen wouldn't agree to any of this, right?"

Does she even have a say in this, r8? She's only a figurehead. If the PM asks her to, doesn't she have to comply?

^ Yes. As a constitutional monarch she acts on the advice of her minister. PM first and foremost.

The way many are talking about the Queen being "put in a terrible position" makes me think she has some say in the matter, but maybe what they're really saying is that constitutionally she has to agree to the PM's wishes, and as such, she'll get the blame for something she has nothing to do with.

It looks like this will be decided in the courts, however, and may not even go to her at all.

^According to the BBC:

"In the current climate, the Queen would have to decide to accept or deny the request. In reality, though, it's highly unlikely she would deny such a request from a sitting prime minister."

I don't see how it goes to the court and, if it does, the court will confirm that proroguing is a legitimate, if nuclear, course of action open to a government.

In related news, the British Pound is now $1.22 in American currency.

[quote]It was a referendum, not an opinion poll.[/quote]

It was very explicitly an advisory referendum R12 and NOT a binding vote. Cameron could have written the legislation to be binding but he didn't.

It WAS in fact an opinion poll whether you like it or not.

It's been sad seeing Brits on Twitter get so bullied that they've gone from pointing out that this was always a non-binding referendum, to having to pander to the crazies by saying it was a "democratic vote and we should respect the results."

I honestly don't know how typical that change has been, since I only follow about 15 UK accounts, but from my personal perspective it's been a significant change and seems to represent a lot of people giving up to the point of feeling completely helpless.

Opinion poll or not it would be very damaging to ignore it. Cameron didn't run that referendum in good faith and he never anticipated the mess he made. But the mess is made. Time to make the best of it. And if a party thinks the EU is the place to be, they can now run on that basis and see what the country says. That's the way the system works.

Remainers are making fools of themselves by rushing to compare Johnson to a dictator. The most he can be accused of doing is bending the parliamentary rules in his favour, which Remainers have done flagrantly and regularly. If anti-Brexiteers are going to live by procedural ploys, they must be ready to die by them too. They'll be back in time to debate (and scheme) before the 31st. The Queen's speech is Oct. 14.

What's really fascinating about this is that, if Parliament really IS shut down till Oct. 14th, there won't be time for anyone to debate Brexit terms or another postponement -- the only remaining alternative to no deal will be revocation of Art. 50.

Now THAT'S excitement.

Is May's deal completely off the table now?

Margaret Thatcher famously warned that the EU would create a federal Europe by the backdoor, and render national parliaments powerless. Those comments were entirely prescient.

Britain must do whatever it can to get out. It may already be too late.

Oh, hi Jacob Rees-Mogg @ r24!

Looking forward to an additional September holiday while London burns, are you?

The best thing that can be said about Thatcher r24 is that she’s still dead.

The Queen approved it.

By constitutional convention, the only time the Queen really go against the advice of a Prime Minister, is if the PM has lost the confidence of the House. The idea that the Queen could arbitrarily act independently has been largely overruled by most constitutional scholars in the UK.

So she approved it before the court case could advance or before a vote of confidence could be held?

Wow. Good luck, everybody.

R29 It's already predicted the court case will be thrown out. While what Johnson did is sneaky and lacks moral leadership, he did not break the law. It is constitutional convention that the power to prorogue rests with the Crown which is only exercised by the advice of the Prime Minister. In fact if the Queen denied Boris' request, it would actually have caused a larger constitutional crisis. In reality the ONLY time the Queen can deny a Prime Minister's request is if he/she has lost the support of the House.

Now what Parliament could do, and frankly should do, is pass a law which takes away this power from the Prime Minister and instead make so any prorogation would have to be put to the house before the Prime Minister advises the Queen.

"Now what Parliament could do, and frankly should do, is pass a law which takes away this power from the Prime Minister..."

r30, can that actually happen? I don't know at all the finer points of all this.

R31: Sure. Parliament can do whatever it wants, as it is Supreme. It can't bind the next Parliament elected though. This is the price of the unwritten Constitution. It relies on tradition and convention.

R31 Because the UK has no written constitution, Parliament is free to enact constitutional laws at will. For example in 2011, Parliament passed the Fix-Election Act which devolved the power to call elections away from the Prime Minister to Parliament. So if a Prime Minister wants to call an election before the end of a 5 year parliamentary term, he/she must get the consent of Parliament before he/she asked the Queen to dissolve it. THis happen in 2017, when Theresa May had to pass a bill allowing her to ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament and call a general election.

R32 If Parliament passed a law restricting prorogation, it would be limited to one parliament it would remain in effect until Parliament changed the law again.

Can't the Lords delay Brexit?

R33: That's my point. They can't stop the next Parliament from repealing any law.

Boris is bringing in Trump to fix things.

Wheres Steve Bannon in all this?

[quote] R12, R13, Does she even have a say in this, [R8]? She's only a figurehead. If the PM asks her to, doesn't she have to comply?

I thought the Queen has a few special powers:

She can delay things.

And I thought that she could do some parliamentary move that calls for new elections and a new PM.

Finally, can’t she just lock herself in the bathroom until Boris goes away?

Oh wow. I had no idea that the Brexit vote was a non-binding referendum. No wonder it's such a mess.

[quote]I had no idea that the Brexit vote was a non-binding referendum.

If it was a non-binding referendum, then we wouldn't be in this mess. Remainers (and I'm one of them) are desperately trying everything to derail Brexit. If the referendum had gone the other way, we would've used it to shut down the leavers for good. Yes, there is a double standard and I think our fundamental flaw is trying to ignore the 17.4 million people who voted leave.

R40, it was, in fact, a non-binding referendum.

EU referendum coverage by the BBC. No talk of it being non-binding. Jump to the point when the result became known. Their faces sunk as they announced "we're out".

That doesn't change the fact that it was, in fact, a non-binding referendum, R42.

Sorry, BBC link. How wrong they were. Listen to the first 5 minutes before jumping 6 hours to when the result became clear. They implications were clear.

Um, R44, that doesn't contradict the fact that it was, in fact, a non-binding referendum. I have no idea why you're trying to pretend otherwise.

And Boris won't be known for destroying the country, it was Cameron. He didn't have to call the referendum.

The vote was "advisory." What the BBC was referring to was the political consequences, not the legal ones. Parliament could simply choose to ignore the referendum and that would be that, although clearly there would be political ramifications if they chose to do so, which is why they've been desperately casting about for a solution that sort of is an exit without really being an exit.

R46, I doubt that's correct. The person who actually shoved this over the finish line will be the one who takes the heat, particularly if things turn sour immediately after that no-deal exit.

Watching the BBC coverage, I'd forgotten that even Nigel Farage had conceded defeat before results started trickling in.

6:40.01 "The British people have spoken and we're out!"

In a non-binding, advisory referendum, R49.

So Cameron's other gamble, the Scottish independence referendum, was non-binding too? C'mon.

Two new polls out this morning (Survation and Yougov) show Boris' numbers have INCREASED since asked to prorogue (Survation has Tories at 31% Labour at 24% and Yougov has Tories 33%, Labour 20%). Both polls show around 60% approve of Boris' decision while support for no-deal brexit is 52 and 56%.

R51, if you would bother to read the links above, you would see that there is a discussion of various referendums and how they are crafted. Since Farage himself has conceded that the referendum was advisory, I'm still not sure why you're trying to pretend that it was not. You haven't been able to find a single link that shows that to be the case.

I tend to agree with this YouTube comment:

[quote]The voters knew what leave the EU meant, and they knew what remain in the EU meant!. Anyone that spouts such insulting garbage is declaring the voters as feeble minded., and must vote again , and again and again till they get he right outcome!. (Remain).

Classic moving of goalposts, and I'm a remainer. I remember how passionate the campaigning was and we were strongly warned of the implications of a leave vote and that was never in doubt.

Actually, R54, given the information that has come out since that referendum, it's become pretty clear that many of the voters did not, in fact, know what leaving the EU meant. There were multiple lies and broken promises that those pushing Brexit propagated and are still propagating.

So what you're advocating is a do-over until you get the result that you want? That's not how democracy works.

[quote]There were multiple lies and broken promises that those pushing Brexit propagated and are still propagating.

This is true. There were a lot of lies and broken promises from the Leave campaign about regained control and unmitigated prosperity. But I would also say the dystopian hellscape painted by the Remain campaign is also untrue. The UK will not become like the Ireland of the potato famine with people dying in the streets from hunger and lack of medicine. Both campaigns lied, one side made false promises and the other tried to scare people with warnings of severe consequences. Both sides exaggerated and one side sold their lies to more people. Again, democracy.

So we'll find out on October 31st if the British people regain their marbles and understand what's good for them or if the European Union really is the Hotel California. No win!

R56, that is how democracy works, The Republicans pull plugs out of the wall, Democrats try to put them back in, and then Republicans pull them back out again, and the Republicans figure if they can keep ahead with the pulling of plugs they will eventually break everything, which is what they want.

Boris Johnson just pulled a plug.

So will Scotland and Northern Ireland finally cut loose and be in the EU?

Would Northern Ireland (or theoretically Wales) even have the option to leave the UK ? Would they be allowed to leave?

Northern Ireland is tricky. No matter what they end up doing, you're probably getting a civil war or terrorism anyway. I still don't see how you can move away from a backstop and not get Northern Ireland in turmoil.

Until the day Catholics outnumber Protestants in Northern Ireland, the will always vote to be part of the UK over the EU. In fact, if the only reason they voted remain is because they didn't expect England to vote leave, otherwise they wouldn't have done anything to distinguish themselves from their English cousins.

Well, here ya go r61. From Politico in May (first source I found):

Northern Ireland has the option of leaving the United Kingdom and joining the Republic by referendum under the Good Friday Agreement, the peace deal that largely ended decades of conflict in the region between pro-British unionists Irish-affiliated nationalists.

The idea had long been widely viewed as a remote prospect due to unionist opposition and post-conflict fatigue toward the idea of constitutional change.

Since the U.K. voted to leave the European Union in 2016, attitudes about unification have been shifting. Brexit does not have majority support in Northern Ireland, and risks economic disruption and the reintroduction of a deeply unpopular border across the island.

Polling in Northern Ireland indicates that support for remaining in the U.K. hinges on how Brexit is resolved.

A united Ireland has majority support in the case of a no-deal Brexit. But remaining in the U.K. is more popular if Brexit does not go ahead. The two sides are neck and neck if the U.K. parliament finally approves the Brexit deal negotiated by the U.K. government, according to polling by LucidTalk.

Get out with no deal. Make a trade agreement with US. That's the idea.

Even if parliament comes up with a law, Boris will ignore it.

The future of the US is riding on Trump.

R54: You're full of shit. You're a leaver. You're also a misdirection troll. Sit down and shut up.

I personally think the only way to end this deadlock is to call an election. What I find interesting is Labour doesn't seem to want one for all their calls of a coup.

That's because the Tories / Johnson are polling better than they have for the three years since the referendum, r65, and they might actually get a majority if a snap election is called.

At this point, I really believe there are only two alternatives left:

1) Revoke Article 50 (very unlikely)

2) No-Deal crash Brexit

We'll see soon.

Wtf is up with the hair always being so messy?

R66 the reason they're polling better is because Russian-pandering Corbyn is such a wishy-washy douche that he won't oppose leaving the EU. He's basically cast this as Labour is "vote leave, but a soft Brexit/in a trading bloc with the EU". Corbyn really needs to go away, but of course he won't. Labour is not an opposition to the Tories anymore.

My goodness. If an election is imminent, shouldn't something as important as Brexit wait for its results? Will it?

"Boris Johnson is prepared to blow up his own parliamentary majority and withdraw the whip from dozens of Conservative MPs if they back plans to stop no-deal Brexit...in an extreme move by Downing Street that would pave the way for an imminent general election."

Who can replace Corbyn on short notice? Because he's ineffectual.

Johnson isn't going to do a Theresa May and call for new elections prior to the Brexit deadline.

R69 I said it earlier on this thread but I'll say it again the whole proroguing thing and now this is a ploy by Boris to bait Remain MPs into forcing a election.

I'm really not a leaver, r64. Just a believer in respecting the rules. Also believe voters should be left to suffer the consequences of their actions or else they'll never learn.

An election is the most logical outcome.

[Quote] Johnson isn't going to do a Theresa May and call for new elections prior to the Brexit deadline.

Maybe he will.

"Speculation of snap election mounts as No 10 calls emergency cabinet ....... sources suggested the vote would come with a commitment that polling day would be before 31 October, though the date would ultimately be in the control of the government."

I said this last week when BJ (giggle) asked the Queen to prorogue Parliament, that it was a simply a ploy to force an election. Polls have the Conservatives double points ahead of Labour! Johnson will win on the narrative that Remainers MPs are acting against the "will of the people." By blocking virtually every form of Brexit, MPs have sealed the UK's fate in a dramatic shift to the right. The only hope is Johnson pulls a Theresa May and bombs at campaigning.

So r76 he was just using the queen as a political pawn? Off with his head, or something like that.

R73: They don't learn, so let's stop it all now. The voters will continue to be stupid. There are no rules here, so enough with the talking points. It was a campaign full of lies and a misinformed vote.

I try to stay interested and follow it, and I know Brexit sucks. But I'm so bored by this drawn-out shit. And this thread reflects why it's all so tedious at this point.

Unpopular opinion: Remainers have lost the narrative to the point that the Conservatives will win a majority. They've spent three years insulting voters intelligence saying they didn't know what they were voting for and they have blocked every viable path to honouring the referendum. They have allowed Brexit to dominate the political agenda for nearly four years when polls show the majority of people just want to move on. Now they're using words like coupe, attacking the Queen etc. It might play okay in areas like London or Edinburgh, but the rest of the country it looks ridiculous. They have allowed Brexiteers to cease on the narratives of "these politicians think they know better than you" and "they're not honouring the will of the people" and that's why Boris will win. Not because people like him, but because he's a protest vote. It's like we've learned nothing from 2016!

R80 So like the US and Trump. Protest vote, that is spot on. I hope the Dems wake up soon here.

R81 Lets not forget the Brexit victory in 2016 was a protest vote and the precursor to Trump. The leave victory wasn't so much an anti-Brussels vote as it was an anti-Westminster vote. It was supposed to be a message to politicians that the British people felt increasing left behind and frustrated by politicians only interested in their own best interests. Brexit was meant to be a reminder from UK voters that politicians work for us. I speak as someone who voted remain that politicians on both sides - but particularly on remain - have not learned a damn thing. Instead of trying to find a middle ground that everyone can live with to a degree, they have esnure a no deal Brexit with a Boris Johnson majority government.

Theresa May made a lot of blunders and I don't want to downplay that, but her deal was the most practical way to deliver Brexit while not driving the UK off a economic cliff. Yes the deal was not perfect but it delivered the results of the referendum yet kept us close to the EU. Even Tony fucking Blair is says there shouldn't be an election because he knows what's going to happen. Thank god my partner and I are moving to Canada next year. The UK is getting what it deserves at this point.

It appears Labour is going to attempt to block an election!

Oy labour, as hapless as the dems here.

The best thing that will come out of Brexit is Irish reunification and an independent Scotland.

I'm a dizzy GoGo boy and I need someone to explain all of this to me-HELP!!!

I am just an outsider, and maybe I'm all drama, but is there a sentiment in the UK that feels like Britian is becoming smaller and smaller in terms of worldwide influence and reputation? And alienating Northern Ireland and Scotland with a hard Brexit even more, driving them out of the UK sounds more likely. Could the UK end up being just K?

R86 Sadly it appears the country is veering further to the right. Poll have Boris in majority territory and two polls this week show over 60% of voters believe we should leave the EU on October 31 with or without a deal. For a while it seem the country was finally have second thoughts about Brexit but since the spring remainer MPs have over played their hand and the narrative is once again becoming pro-brexit.

Help me. Is a general election is good for conservatives or for progressives? Does Boris think he will win?

[quote] The leave victory wasn't so much an anti-Brussels vote as it was an anti-Westminster vote.

No, many people in Britain don’t like the big-wigs in Brussels. The EU HQ has gradually turned into an unwieldy, unaccountable, non-transparent, closed-doors, behemoth Bureaucracy, yet passing Directives (laws) binding on Britain.

And now Hungary, Poland, Romania and the rest of the Eastern Bloc have joined the EU. The EU is not what it was anymore. Hungary is spreading its homophobic ideology in the EU, Poland is backing it up and vetoing any sanctions against Hungary’s homophobia, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria & Romania are looking for multi-million handouts from Britain, etc.

Ever since the Eastern Bloc joined the EU, things went downhill. Britain is “net contributor” to the EU budget, while these new members are in a cushy, self-serving position of being “net recipients”. Moreover, I don’t want these problematic Eastern bloc countries 'group-voting' on EU legislation & regulations that would apply to Britain. We clearly don’t see eye-to-eye with them on many EU policy issues. Due to expanding its membership to new member-states which demand $$$ handouts but don’t want to follow EU rules in return, the EU has become an unruly MESS:

[quote] Reuters, 2018: “… representatives of Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Bulgaria and Romania met in Budapest with the EU's Budget Commissioner Guenther Oettinger to discuss issues including the bloc's next budget plan … The ... countries of the east are mostly Net Recipients of EU funds, and worried that a shortfall in the bloc's budget would leave them with less cash.

[quote] NY Times, 2018: “In the face of a challenge to European democratic values from Poland and Hungary, Brussels is naturally turning to money to get at least some leverage over the popular, populist governments there … namely in Poland and Hungary, among the TOP money-getters in the EU. That money is no small change. In Poland, EU money has [funded] some 6% of infrastructure spending; in Hungary, the figure is 55%. BUT both countries have been criticized for increasing state control over the news media and especially the judiciary, which goes to the heart of European commitments to freedom of the press, the rule of law and democratic transparency. The means to influence or punish member states for violations of European principles are very weak, however. Real censure is subject to veto, making it difficult for Brussels to challenge democratically elected leaders, even when their practices in office are suspect.

[quote] In an unusually explicit Twitter thread after the Czech elections last autumn, Juho Romakkaniemi, the former head of the cabinet of another European Commission vice president, Jyrki Katainen, asked: “How long the other MS [member states] are willing to PAY large sums for “cohesion” if it leads to DIVERGENCE? Poland, Hungary and now the Czechs are amongst the biggest Net Recievers from EU budget and seem to get more and more critical of the EU.” Mr. Romakkaniemi noted that Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic were among the highest net recipients of EU funds, while their governments indulge in euroskeptic politics. “My fear is that [their] populistic path leads to divergence from the E.U. core values of freedom and Rule of Law — until a breaking point,” he said.

Britain can re-join the EU in the future. But only after the EU finally grows some balls and kicks out countries who just want suck $$$ out of British struggling taxpayers & the EU, but don’t want to play by any EU rules (e.g. Hungary). It’s a slap in the face to be in a “union” with countries like that. The EU should have kept its membership as it was in 2003, before the Visegrad Group joined.

*want to suck $$$ (from the EU's tit)

How interesting that this guy is called Boris, was born in America and holds an American passport, and couldn't give a FUCK about Brexit!

His actual name is Alexander. But he went to a very posh school where there were too many other "Alexanders" - so he started using his middle name instead, to stand out.

R88 A general election is a gamble, and Boris likes to gamble.

A Tory MP just crossed over while Boris was speaking. He's has lost his majority.

Serve him right.

Let the foolishness continue

Here is a link to Tory MP defecting to Lib Dems while Boris Johnson was addressing Parliament. Johnson no longer has a majority in Parliament.

So an automatic election then? Man, the UK, Italy and Spain are all grappling with potential snap elections, what's with all these hanging parliaments?

No, *BoJo* wants an election because polls are saying Conservatives have the edge and then with that and the suspension of Parliament, there won't be time to do anything except crash out. These guys are trying to prevent it.

Parliament has to have a 2/3 majority agree to hold new elections.

He doesn't need the support of Parliament to leave the EU with no deal. They would have to remove him as PM for that to be prevented.

r99 The Fixed-term Parliaments Act was an amazingly stupid idea. And yet the Tories thought they were so clever when they passed it. Now when the government needs to call a snap election they are unable to do so without a 2/3 parliamentary majority. Labour holds Boris Johnson hostage. The Tories are truly the nasty and stupid party.

The UK needs a written Constitution - something that can't easily be changed from Parliament to Parliament.

So we've got a PM trying to progue parliament and we've got opposition leaders trying to block an election....I don't care if you're remain or leave, this country needs to new leaders!

Italy and Spain appear to have resolved their issues. The UK on the other hand seems to be heading into the abyss.

Labour and other parties are trying to block and election...I'm saying to now, this will cause Boris' numbers to rise.

R104: They don't want an election until No Deal is off the table. A campaign in the middle of October would make it impossible to stop No Deal on Halloween. They're right to block until that. Stop your screaming.

R105 Also the PM can change the election date without going thru parliament again. And we all know Boris.

Boris has at least two avenues to trigger an election before October 31st. One is to table a motion of no confidence in himself (his government). Any other PM wouldn't have dared but I wouldn't put it past Boris.

R107 The other is to kill himself?

All he has to do is wait them out until October 31st.

Here comes a Conservative landslide.

My contention is that a change of this magnitude should never be implemented based on a simple majority vote. It should require a supermajority, such as 60%, or 66%. You shouldn’t completely redesign your economic and political system based on a simple majority.

The Brexit vote passed by less than 2% of the vote. Since that time, more than 2% of eligible voters have changed, through death, or upon reaching the age of majority, or emigration, naturalization, and other means. Suppose they repeated the vote now, and Brexit failed by 1%, do you keep having votes, changing the entire makeup of your economy and political structure flippity-floppily as the vote changes by tiny margins?

Some politician with guts ought to say as much and demand that no change be made until and unless there is widespread consensus that change is warranted.

In the US, we allow Constitutional Amendments but the hurdle is high. It has to pass a supermajority of 3/4 of State legislatures, and 2/3 of both houses of Congress, but we still have managed to pass 27. The filibuster for appointments and legislation is custom, not law, and requires a 60 vote margin in the Senate to override. The Congress can override a Presidential veto with a supermajority. Treaties require a supermajority, etc. This ensures that big changes do not happen unless the country is solidly behind it.

As I suspected, YouGov poll conducted on Monday and Tuesday show Boris numbers have increased again!

Conservative support is 37% (+5 from last poll) VS Labour 18% (-6).

62% (+2) said UK should leave on October 31, 2019 even if it means no deal. 31% (-8) said UK should stay and 7% were unsure.

51% of people would prefer no deal over Corbyn becoming Prime Minister (+3).

44% (+6) said Boris is a better Prime Minister while 22% said preferred Corbyn.

68% (+13) said there should be a snap election to resolve Brexit.

71% believe politicians are not working in the public's best interest!

So now we know why Labour doesn't want an election.

Corbyn has said he is will to aceed to an election before October 31 ... backbench labour MPs are revolting.

R112 Jesus Christ!

No one likes Russian stooge Corbyn.

R111, not to mention that you ask 100 Brexiteers what Brexit means and you'll get 100 different answers. In or Out really didn't cover it.

So they're as stupid in Britain as they are in the US, r112?

And everyone loves BJ, r115? The friend of Russian stooge Trump?

R107, I think Boris Johnson is so battered, bruised and humiliated he probably wouldn’t try a vote of no confidence in his own government. The one thing that has been made clear the last two days is that the British do not like “Mitch McConnell” like tactics in parliament. What you saw last night when 21 Tory MPs defied Johnson is exactly what it means to be British - spirited, big hearted with a sense of principled fair play.

Boris Johnson’s plans have blown up spectacularly in his face. He’s prorogued parliament just when he could use another 5 weeks to get a deal through. Ha fucked himself and gotten fucked at least 5x in the last 24 hours: lost his majority, lost control of parliament, increased his government’s minority status, lost any chance to crash out the EU (a lunatic objective to begin with) and didn’t call his GE at the right time (and apparently his whips can’t even count how many votes they have because they were WAY short of the 2/3 needed). As expected, he’s a fucking shambles as PM - worse than he was as a foreign secretary. Anyone who thinks Boris is going to deliver their Brexit dreams is delusional as well as a very poor judge of character. As much as I hate to say it, it’s actually Corbyn who has shown effective leadership though I suspect it’s more of a Labour collective behind the scenes.

The polls? Monday’s polls? That was a long time ago. I think most reasonable people expect the GE to return another hung parliament so it doesn’t matter what the polls say. The Torys- especially this current lineup - aren’t going to return anything like a majority. Boris is out of moves, completely checkmated - what’s he going to campaign on now? He doesn’t want to go to Brussels on the 17th because he has NOTHING to negotiate. Crashing out was his plan and he figured his nearest and dearest would survive that and everybody else could get fucked. Well he’s only fucked himself now. How long do you think his cabinet is going to stay on The Good Ship Boris? After the way he and Cummings have treated them? I would expect cabinet resignations by the weekend. And the British do not like these tactics of his.

Brexiteers are loud but they do not have a majority. That’s why they’re getting increasingly hysterical. Since Monday, more than 100,000 people have registered to vote, about 70% of them under 34 and it’s not up vote for Boris or Leave. People are paying attention, they know what’s at stake. They’ll put an end to any possibility of a destructive no deal Brexit by Monday before parliament is prorogued for 5 weeks from Tuesday (Boris is such a fool). GE the end of November, 2nd Ref in January when the majority of British people will vote Remain and bring an end to this tiresome madness.

^^Oh and the Torys won’t be able to form a government anyway so the opposition will form a coalition to see it through.

Anything Boris Johnson touches turns to shit.

More bad news for Boris.

I think he is pretty much over...not many will vote in favor. Just like in America, the conservatives are hanging themselves.

I think he is pretty much over...not many will vote in favor. Just like in America, the conservatives are hanging themselves.

Well, this Brexist stuff has shown me how little I know about Britain’s Parliamentary system. In the US our politicians hate elections because they run the risk of change. In the UK, you all use elections to push through the majorities prerogatives?

I’m not pro-Brexit, but I’d be pissed if a foreign government organization was setting America’s laws. Fuck off with that shit. We have a lot of issues in the US, but I will give us credit for always being independent. I can see the desire for the British to take back control of their country.

Maybe in the end the Queen can just veto this whole thing. It is her government after all, lol. That was a joke, I know the Queen can’t actually help her subjects. Sort of like the failure of the Electoral College to tell Trump to fuck off.

r119 I wasn't talking about Boris Johnson. Corbyn in particular has been the reason people were fleeing Labour for other parties, with his wishy-washy "soft Brexit" option and his refusal for the longest time to rule out Brexit at all, if he were PM. Under his leadership Labour has ceased to become a true opposition party. That's in addition to the Russian stuff.

r125 you are too stupid to live, lol.

[Quote] So they're as stupid in Britain as they are in the US, [R112]?

Yes. They are clever in a cunning sort of way. They will win the election.

Using racism and nationalist sentiment to fool the yokels into voting them in so they can make a lot of money by passing legislation for unbridled capitalism. Watch for dismantling and looting of social programs, removal of environmental controls on corporations, zero taxation on businesses. They will start wars to award military contracts. Watch out for uncontrolled data theft, public surveillance and manipulation.

Scotland and northern Ireland should get out ASAP.

Opinium poll covering Monday through Wednesday has Conservatives at 38%, Labour 16%, Lib Dem16%, Brexit 15%, SNP 4%

R129 64% believe Corbyn should support a snap election for October 14

The election is coming and the MPs will be made to pay. Odds of a no-deal still up at ladbrokes.

So this is how Johnson triggers an election. He resubmits the motion on Monday after the No-deal law has been passed then:

I. Gets two thirds support of parliament under the Fixed Parliaments Act (very, very unlikely)

II. Tables a motion of no confidence in himself. thereby forcing Labour's hand

I betting an election on October 15th.

R132, I’ve been trying to follow the stuff going on, but I’m confused by one thing—why would an election help him at this time?

Before all this mess, he had a parliamentary majority of just one, which wasn't really a majority because about 20 odd conservative MPs were willing to cross the aisle to vote with the opposition to prevent no deal. Now he's effectively fired the rebels and wants to run the election with just unwavering brexiteers. If he wins, no deal will be back on the table.

Think what Bozo's hair could have been.

Hanbury poll confirms the rise in Boris' numbers!

33% would still vote Conservative despite the events of the week. 22% would vote Labour. 17% Lib Dem. 14% Brexit.

52% believe the UK should leave the EU on October 31 even with no deal

56% believe that there should been an election before October 31.

43% think having Corbyn as PM would be worse than No Deal Brexit

33% Think no deal is worse than Corbyn

25% both are equal bad.

Either way you cut it, it's going to be no deal, isn't it?

Because leaving Eu makes no sense, yeah it will be no-deal.

Emo BoJo: "I'd rather be dead than delay Brexit"

So would we rather see you dead in a ditch, Boris.

In the same speech, he even makes a cop sick to their stomach. (See the last three or so minutes.)

Whoever keeps posting these "poll updates" - include a link to these pills, please. You're clearly pushing an agenda, so I'm going to need to see the receipts

R136 the link is below

R142 that isn't the same as the rest of what you've been saying. People don't like Jeremy Corbyn (for good reason). It doesn't mean they want a No Deal Brexit, just that he's very unpopular and should not be the head of Labour.

R143, I'm not R136 however, this polls shows 52% of the country favour no deal.

R144 that is not what the linked article shows. In fact, it shows, based on polling, if a second referendum were to happen, the Remainers would win.

It's kind of hilarious how chaotic this week has been for Boris. You keep thinking it can't get any more embarrassing and then it does.

He sure has gotten kicked in the balls left and right, this week--by even his own brother! If only it could happen in the U.S. If only we had a party that put country before itself.

^^^Speaking as a Democrat, of course. The GOP is no party of MINE.^^^

Yes r148 I think r147 was hoping the Democratic Party would also put country first. Like, IMPEACH!

In all honesty if there is an election I have no clue who I'd vote for. There is no way in hell I want Boris, but I HATE Corbyn. I won't vote Lib Dem and of course not Brexit. I might just check a random candidate.

DL, where such wonderful gays would vote for Boris Johnson over Jeremy Corbyn.

Corbyn is the one showing real leadership this week. They’re not going to call an election until after the 31st of October, at which their poll numbers go up considerably. I still wonder about the veracity of these polls though. Boris has no discernible majority, the Torys won’t win a single seat in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or London - not sure where they’re drawing all this supposed support from. It’s not even clear what they’ll campaign on at this point. They’re call for Brexit would be a lot more convincing if they actually had a plan and a solution to the backstop - but they don’t. I think the next GE will have to be decisive - nobody’s interested in pie in the sky anymore. There will be a youthquake as well, which I don’t think is going to go the Torys’ way.

One thing’s for sure - it doesn’t seem Boris is up for a 5 week campaign with his feet held to the fire. He’s the PM now - he can’t talk shit. As much as the Americans love their reality show/car crash President, it’s not something the British go for. The centre will not hold for Boris and Farage is just a less appealing shadow of him so what is he going to promise? How much longer can these Brexiteers continue to blame everybody else for their failure?

This clip is why I fear Labour will not an election. What she is saying is absolutely hilarious in a "wtf bitch" kind of way. Beyond Corbyn's unpopularity, Labour after three years still has no clear message on Brexit. Boris for all the shit he's done to himself has a clear message, "I want out." I'm hoping I'm wrong but look Corbyn should have won against Theresa May and he should be polling higher than Boris, but he's too far left for many to get onboard with.

Are you seeing the same polls everyone else is seeing, r152. The reason Corbyn is blocking an election is because Bojo will surely win and get his majority.

BREAKING: Boris is set to meet with the Queen tomorrow. This can mean one of three things:

1) He is going to ask the Queen to move up prorogation to effective immediately, that means the no deal bill would be stopped.

2) He is going to ask the Queen to retract the prorogation of Parliament.

3) He's going to resign and tell the Queen to call on someone else to form government

4) He's going to inform the Queen he no longer commands a majority. This would leave the Queen in the position of either calling or Corbyn or calling an election.

[Quote] 1) He is going to ask the Queen to move up prorogation to effective immediately,

Can he do that? In a perverse way if kinda like to see that. To see what the queen does.

[Quote] 1) He is going to ask the Queen to move up prorogation to effective immediately,

Can he do that? In a perverse way if kinda like to see that. To see what the queen does.

Opposition, whatever happens please don't attack the Queen. It's not helping your polls.

Boris has used the queen in the most shameful manner.

Boris apparently did his homework.

—

Johnson goaded 21 problematic Rebel Tories into voting against him. Those Tories have been removed from the party and will lose their seats in the next election. Good riddance.

Because of foolish Remainer actions, Johnson will no longer have to go through the charades of working out a deal with the EU.

Johnson's hands are effectively bound and he welcomes that! He will not have to work out a deal. Instead he can lay the blame on the EU and on the Remainers for removing the option to negotiate with the EU.

By removing the 21 rebels, Johnson won the support of Nigel Farage thereby allowing a coalition between the Brexit Party and the Tories minus the rebel problem makers.

The Remainers are hopelessly split. Corbyn wants a referendum or the right to work out a customs deal with the EU. The Liberal Democrats want to remain. Many Labour party members want Brexit.

Delusional Remainers

My 5 comments from yesterday are backed up by events and independent analysis today.

Meanwhile, delusional Remainers keep believing they have the upper hand.

In reality, the Remainers do precisely what Johnson says: strip him of any chance of working out a deal.

It's debatable if Johnson really wants a deal. I don't pretend to know. I do know he cannot live with the backstop.

The deal question is moot even though the result sure isn't.

Johnson will form an alliance with the Brexit party if for no other reason than Remainers forced him into that hard stance.

Look for a big Johnson win in the next election whether or not he gives into the Benn bill to get it.

Link for analysis

R161 anything written by The Daily Telegraph is propaganda, not analysis. To the rabid brexiteer(s) on this thread, Datalounge isn’t The Daily Mail and we aren’t your furious gammon mates... nobody is buying your ranting about remoaners. It’s dull and you are stupid. .

R160 Fiendishly clever of the BoJo. (Roll eyes).

The Supreme Court will not hear the legal challenge regarding Boris' decision to prorogue parliament.

Neither here not there but I was watching a film set between London and Paris. And I am so sad England may be closing itself off from the future. Especially sad for the younger people.

Labour’s Yvette Cooper, the chair of the home affairs select committee, said: “For Boris Johnson to make so many police stop their training and work to be part of his political stunt is an abuse of power."

"We have an opportunity to bring down Boris, to break Boris and to bring down Brexit, and we must take that."

Hope you are right r160. As an American I am rooting for you!

BoJo: "I will refuse to request Brexit extension even if MPs pass law".

Looks like no deal remains the most likely outcome.

Which film was that, R165?

Well, she's right R166.

R169 No confidence next? How many MPs are needed?

R170 Personal Shopper.

R169 What happens if BoJo breaks the law?

What is the context of r146?

[quote]What happens if BoJo breaks the law?

No confidence vote, which plays into his hands.

"Johnson is due to stay with the Queen at Balmoral on Friday night with his partner, Carrie Symonds, in line with a tradition for prime ministers during annual summer break there. The Mail on Sunday reported last month that Symonds and Johnson would share a room, despite a long-standing convention where unmarried couples are barred from doing so."

Oy, the queen... What's with her?

The Queen is no fan of the E.U.

The Conservatives will suffer in a GE. It’s clear the majority of MPs don’t want the catastrophe of a No Deal Brexit and it’s a minority of out of touch Tories pushing for it.

R175 How does it play into his hands?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

r174

I can't believe we are discussing the PM possibly breaking the law.

Why not. Our president does everyday.

Why not. Our president does everyday.

Ah, it figures. R160 is our resident Idiot Libertarian Troll, the moron who is reliably wrong about, well, everything.

He's not breaking the law. The British PM has a lot of power.

R187 BoJo is talking about breaking the law which will be Hillary Benn's bill once it receives Royal Assent.

r188 But he already told the parliament several times this week that he would uphold the law. So where is this talk about him breaking it coming from?

Probably because what he's saying publicly doesn't match what he's saying privately, R189.

Here you go R189, from The Sun. Also this from The Independent: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-boris-johnson-no-deal-law-michael-gove-bill-latest-a9087961.html Bearing in mind that Michael Gove is a former Justice Secretary, the suggestion is especially monstrous coming from him.

YouGov poll shows 41% of Labour voters believe their should be mid-October election, while 36% are against.

R179 I'm praying Boris is defeated BUT two polls out by YouGov and Deltapoll (the links are the other Brexit thread) covering Monday to Wednesday suggests Labour's support has gone down due to their decision to block a mid-October election. We'll wait to see what the numbers are over the weekend, but blocking an election creates the narrative that "Labour is afraid of the people"

Enh, the question of GE timing isn't that poisonous politically. People will get over it quickly.

[quote]Johnson will form an alliance with the Brexit party if for no other reason than Remainers forced him into that hard stance.

And Farage will stab Johnson in the back at the first opportunity.

It's not him "breaking" the law. As PM, he has the power to ignore or accept Parliament's request. Of course, they can No Confidence Vote him after that, but he wouldn't be arrested/etc.

It wasn't a request, R196.

r197 my point is, he can choose to ignore the law or not. It isn't going to be like if you or me got pulled over for running a red light, which would be "breaking a law". It will spell the end of him as PM because the Parliament can remove him, but he can, actually, do it, without being sent to prison/paying a fine/etc.

R198 Why don't you say "breaking a request" So your first point also stands.

r199 it's alright to admit you were horribly wrong.

R198 It appears that the Hillary Benn bill will receive Royal Assent on Monday and go onto the statute book. If BoJo does not follow the statute he breaks the law. The penalty is another matter: no, I don't think the bill provides for 20 years in gaol (which is what he deserves) but any action / failure to act in breach of the statute would be unlawful and the courts would issue an injunction against BoJo - failure to obey the injunction could be contempt of court and could lead to prison for BoJo; the actions in breach of the statute could be declared null and void by the courts; the courts could order BoJo to take the action, if any, which he had failed to take.

"...theoretically, Mr Johnson could refuse to write or sign that letter. But that would almost certainly lead to court action. At the final stage of the bill on Friday, Brexit minister C said the government would "adhere to the law"."

Isn't it marvellous that these days ministers have to confirm that [on this occasion] the "the government would "adhere to the law" when its adherence to the law should be taken for granted?

[quote] "With parliament due to be suspended by next Thursday at the latest, it now appears unlikely Johnson will succeed in his bid to force an election before 31 October – unless he takes the nuclear option of resigning."

What happens if the pig resigns? Why is it the nuclear option? If he resigns, the person in the Commons who commands a majority should be commissioned by the Queen to form a government. There need not necessarily be a general election just because BoJo throws his toys out of his pram and resigns; he'll have to move out of No. 10 with his sow of a concubine of course. It seems he may resign as PM but remain leader of the party: this is what Chamberlain did when Churchill became PM but given the Cons have no majority in the Commons, leader of the party will be a poor consolation an ex-PM, even a flash-in-the-pan PM like BoJo.

BoJo is on his 44th day. The shortest tenure as PM.

That photo of him with the steer is hilarious.

If only the US Congress would uphold and implement the law. Sigh.

R206 Congress refers claims against the excutive to the courts. The US arrangements and those in the UK are very different. In the US there are three co-equal branches of government. In the UK, parliament is supreme: parliament consists of the Queen, the House of Lords and the House of Commons; ministers all sit in the Lords or the Commons; the executive is responsible to parliament; as a rule (but not now) the executive controls the parliamentary timetable. The role of the courts in connection with the UK parliament is very limited because parliament is supreme.

[quote] Johnson’s preference has always been to face the voters before the exit deadline, lest he be cast as having failed in his “do or die” mission to leave by 31 October. This is the prize the opposition has agreed to deny him, forcing him, they hope, to confront the electorate in November as a failure, guilty of either treachery or incompetence. Their hope is that Johnson’s inability to take Britain out of the EU will pump new air into the Brexit party balloon, thereby splitting the leave vote that Johnson had bet everything on uniting around himself.

Lurid but nice ...

In an election if no party emerges the outright winner, who will the lib dems side with?

R209 The LibDems will be the hard-nosed bitches, thank goodness, that they were in 2010: they will side with the party most willing to advance their agenda like no ID cards and fixed term parliaments. This time they will side with the party least likely to deliver Brexit, at the moment that looks like Labour. However, you assume they will be third: they could come second or even first what with all the remainers in both Cons and Lab parties who are all so disappointed.

Could Sinn Fein finally take their seats? They're Remainers, no? If it's to save the frictionless border...

Survation poll taken on Thursday September 5. Change is measured based on August 30 poll by Survation.

"Despite a chaotic week for the Prime Minister, Conservatives see minor dip, Labour unchanged, while Brexit Party makes gains"

CON: 29% (-2) LAB: 24% (=) LDM: 18% (-3), BXP: 17% (+3) GRN: 3% (=)

From Survation website:

When asked "should MPs have blocked an election?" No: 43% Yes: 35% Unsure: 21%

When asked "should there be an election before October 31?" Yes 48% No 31% Unsure 20%

When asked: "was the Prime Minister right to expel Tory MPs?" Yes 43% No 18% Unsure 39%

When asked "whom do you prefer as Prime Minister?" 46% Boris Johnson 26% Jeremy Corbyn Unsure 29%

Political theater is fun.

R181

None of those options actually include Brexit.

R203

Your catholic command of British parliamentary procedure & political legality is impressive!

You almost sound intelligent enough to be a BBC news anchor.

So r212 the road map looks like-

-bojo will be elected pm in a november election

- uk will crash out with a no deal on January 31

-Uk will have a bojo farage bannon government for the foreseeable future

-with close ties to trump and trump jr till about 2030

-together they will destroy Iran g7 and eu

-putin will recreate the russian empire

R216, I notice a distinct lack of Lesbians mentioned in your post.

R216

Your post seems humorous, like that little comedy “Se7en”.

If the Eurocrats keep pushing then all hell will eventually break loose.

Do you think the problems are going to go away because one big name slime politico gets elected over their even more corrupt opponents?

Northern Ireland and Wales and London (City of) should be independent of Britain. Or perhaps vice versa in the latter case.

The EU has become an unwieldy, convoluted, non-transparent behemoth that re-distributes money from British taxpayers to manipulative poorer countries, demanding handouts.

Britain, German and France are "net contributors" to the EU budget, while Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, etc are "net beneficiaries". And now that Britain is leaving, Slovakia etc are protesting: "But who will give us free money $$$ and handouts then?".

Why should UK tax money go to build roads in Romania and Slovakia? They should build their own roads, especially since Britain is already struggling with financing its OWN increasing domestic infrastructure problems (hospitals are over-stuffed with patients and failing, railways are breaking down, tube/subway costs are going up, etc):

[quote] BBC: "The EU spends the money on a wide range of projects, but about 3/4 (!) of the budget every year goes to 2 main areas: agriculture and development of poorer areas of the EU. So, poorer countries and those with a lot of farms get more [money from EU taxpayers].

The EU has become a "hybrid-socialist wealth-redistribution fund". And that would be all fine and dandy - but many non-rich British taxpayers are struggling themselves (and being slapped with economic austerity: social projects in Britain are being cut, teachers are being under-paid, there's not enough budget for new hospital rooms so people are treated in hospital corridors, the police force is suffering budget cuts). With all these domestic under-financed problems, it's unfair to expect British taxpayers to send $$$ handouts to random farmers in Romania.

The EU has completely lost its marbles and its plot - it's become something very different from what it used to be.

[Quote] Do you think the problems are going to go away because one big name slime politico gets elected over their even more corrupt opponents?

Problems won't go away but will mount. The political system will change, become democracy in name only.

[Quote] Why should UK tax money go to build roads in Romania and Slovakia?

Right. If that's the reigning British thinking and you don't know how to work together then it's better for the others if you leave. Whether it's good for you remains to be seen.

Lol, R221, it's actually not "better for the others". All the ex-communist states mooching off Britain, France and Germany are now freaking out about their EU handout paycheck being slashed because Britain is leaving. Slovakia, etc just had an EU meeting and threw hissy-fits about not getting their usual benefits, subsidised by British taxpayers.

And even regardless of Britain, the more developed states and the ex-communist moochers no longer "know how to work together". Britain leaving won't make those problems & increasing cat-fights within the EU (over budget MONEY allocation between member-states) go away. Everyone in the EU are now trying to get more money from the budget - just for themselves. Some states are even REFUSING to sign a positive EU climate change agreement (carbon decrease) unless they get paid $$$ in return - they're holding out and using the environment as a cold bargaining chip.

[quote] July 2019: "Poland was one of 4 member states to BLOCK a deal on net zero emissions at the last meeting of national leaders in June. Finland has made strengthening climate ambition top priority for its 6-month presidency of the European Council, with the next moment to broker a settlement in October. But the timing of Polish elections in late autumn and simultaneous WRANGLING over the EU budget mean Warsaw is unlikely to arrive ready to compromise

[quote] Lidia Wojtal, a former Polish negotiator, told Climate Home News that Poland “will not agree to carbon neutrality by October”. “I don’t see how Poland will agree to lose this very strong negotiating position before the budget is agreed...".

As I said, the EU has become an unmanageable clusterfuck, with EVERY member state selfishly pulling in different directions, just to serve its own money-grabbing interests. And that's not Britain's fault - it's been going on for a long time now.

*Everyone in the EU is

It is neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.

Yes R211 Sinn Fein really ought to get involved as the Irish border is right at the center of the debate. Ireland has played a dominant role in mainland and then UK politics since the Middle Ages: why it was overlooked in the Brexit referendum debate in 2016 is very, very odd.

Don't blame the former communist countries for sucking up the budget. They didn't invent that knack but merely adopted it. I used to call it the Portuguese approach: whatever policy the Commission was proposing, the Portuguese would say, "Okay, okay, where do we sign? And when do we get the money?" Plucky little Portugal joined the EEC (later to become the EU) in 1986 and has never looked back!

Portugal is the West Virginia of Europe.

Although Portuguese men tend to have the biggest butts in Europe too!

"MPs 'checked with EU chiefs over Brexit delay' before passing bill."

[quote] David Lidington, the de facto deputy prime minister when Theresa May was in Downing Street, said it would set a “dangerous precedent” if Johnson chose to break the law. Lidington, a former Europe minister, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme he did not think Johnson would be willing to break the law. “I cannot believe it will come to that,” he said. “It is such a fundamental principle that we are governed by the rule of law that I hope no party would question it. Defying any particular law sets a really dangerous precedent.”

R227 The W.Va. of Europe has to be Moldova, because the UN does not recognize Transnistria as a country. Within the EU, its W.Va. is Romania.

Resignation by BoJo "risky":

[quote] "Resign - He could quit as PM with the tactical aim of getting back in, letting Jeremy Corbyn go to Brussels for an extension before triggering a general election he would hope to win. Dr White calls this "risky", with no guarantee the Queen would nominate Mr Corbyn as interim leader. The tactic could otherwise backfire, going down badly with voters and handing other advantages to the opposition."

REES-MOGG: FRAUD - OFFICIAL

[quote] Soames called Rees-Mogg an “absolute fraud” who is “a living example of what a moderately cut double-breasted suit and a decent tie can do with an ultra-posh voice and a bit of ginger stuck up his arse”.

Johnson, Rees-Mogg and Soames were all educated at Eton. What a mess!

Lock him up!

If he resigns couldn't some moderate Conservative take over as PM. Of course they tried that with May.

That little rat Give and the insufferable Rees-Mogg are waiting in the wings.

Gove and Mogg are in the current government and would never, ever be acceptable as caretaker PM. It would have to be someone like Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman, Hilary Benn or Yvette Cooper. Corbyn is also out, but he is in denial about that at present.

Best description of Mogg I heard is "15 year old boy."

BoJo would rather die in a ditch than delay brexit, but I’m sure he doesn’t want to go to goal. He’ll delay.

R235, without even watching this video I thought "insufferable twat".

Jacob Rees-Mogg told to 'sit up man!' - BBC News

I will partially blame them, R226, because dealing with mooching Portugal and Greece is already bad enough. But adding to that a whole new group of ex-commie moochers and hangers-on is becoming too much. It tips over the whole balance of the union.

The EU is giving them Western taxpayer $$$ and in return asks for certain policies (climate change, gay rights, helping out with refugees). But those ex-commies just pocket the taxpayer money - and then essentially give the EU the finger. Hungary said screw you to gay rights. Poland supported homophobic Hungary in EU meetings & also said screw you to climate change CO2 reduction policies. None of them want to help out with refugees. So what kind of “union” has this become? We send them money and, instead of being grateful, they [italic]veto[/italic] EU’s human right charter, [italic]block[/italic] EU gay rights legislation & climate change policies, and think [italic]they[/italic] run the EU now?

The problem with the EU is that it has no power to punish & reign in such uncontrollable members - the EU tried to enforce sanctions against Hungary for spreading homophobia. But Poland backed up Hungary and simply vetoed the sanctions. The EU has become toothless and unmanageable. There’s no cohesion anymore.

As a taxpayer, I don’t want my taxes to be sent to such ‘member states’, especially if they intentionally BLOCK EU gay rights legislation. I don’t want to be in any “union” with them, it that’s how they thank the EU and Britain for the huge $$$ handouts they get annually. Developed EU states thought that, in exchange for the generous money, they'd at least show cooperation & cohesion - but instead they just pocket the money and dance to their own nationalistic, right-wing tune, as if they don't owe anyone anything:

[quote] EU Observer, Dec. 2018: “Budapest and Warsaw … Both of their right-wing governments have a track record of blocking EU gay rights texts. Poland, which has one of the worst scores on gay rights in Ilga-Europe's ranking, did it in October when it stopped the EU from signing off on Europe's Fundamental Rights Charter. Hungary fares better in the Ilga-Europe ranking, but it also blocked adoption of an EU gay rights action plan in 2016. They say EU gay rights activism impinges on their sovereignty and goes against conservative values in Hungarian and Polish society. But other Roman Catholic countries and Orthodox Christian ones, such as Italy and Spain or Greece and Cyprus, saw no problem in signing both EU texts on Thursday. Hungary and Poland's ruling Fidesz and Law and Justice parties mix homophobic rhetoric, with xenophobic, antisemitic, and eurosceptic language at home.”

R240 Jesus Christ we get it, you hate the fucking EU. All the words you're using are from the Republican US playbook, btw, "redistributing", "welfare" etc.

You're on a thread about Britain and Brexit, R241. And yet you're trying to make it all about "US Republicans", as if the whole world should view things only through the lens of "Murica!" politics. How more self-centred can you be.

And, no, “Redistributing wealth" wasn't coined by US Republicans and is not defined by any US “playbook”, R241. That’s such a navel-gazing assumption. It was popularised by European socialists. And “welfare” wasn’t coined by “Murica!” either. It’s a neutral term used in Europe to describe social programs. By the way, "all the words I'm using"? No, are you dyslexic? I never used the term "welfare" - I wrote "wealth". You're projecting your own triggered thoughts on me.

R242 you seem very Triggered. Shouldn't you be in a Meghan Markle thread, ranting against her with 500 word screeds?

I pointed out that you're projecting on me, R243. And your reply is to project on me even further?

What makes you think I care about Markle - the irony is that [italic]you[/italic] brought her up, not me. But I see where you're going with your straw-manning: "USA! USA! Republicans! Markle! Racists! Blacks! Reee!". Sorry, I don't play along with your wild, disjointed fantasies. If [italic]you[/italic] want to "rant" about Markle or US Repubs - feel free to do that on another thread. This is a thread about British politics.

r238 I assume you mean "gaol" not "goal". Although watching fat Boris Johnson attempt to play goalkeeper for 90 minutes would be an absolute delight.

That's the one Green Party member of Parliament addressing Mogg.

r244 you're unhinged, dear. Perhaps you should have a couple of Xanax and a nice rest.

Brexit's shining knights--BoJo and the homophobic, anti-choice superior cunt Jacob-Mogg. Almost as pretty as Trump and his MAGA contingent of twats. What an unsavory bunch.

Btw, "redistributing wealth" means something else very different now--in the U.S., at least, it means "redistributing" wealth, or as much as can be scammed through massive tax cuts, right back to the richest. It's a redistribution of wealth, all right--right back where it started.

Among right wing posters like the unhinged screed-posting one upthread, it means almost the same thing it does in the UK as it does in the US, that is, it's a talking point meaning "paying for black/foreign people to be lazy and spending MY HARD EARNED TAXES TO DO IT"

They're lining up to take Boris to court on his way to prison. Perhaps he will later be found dead in a ditch en route.

[quote] Among right wing posters like the unhinged screed-posting one upthread, [redistribution of wealth] means almost the same thing it does in the UK as it does in the US, that is, it's a talking point meaning "paying for black/foreign people to be lazy and spending MY HARD EARNED TAXES TO DO IT"

R243 = R247 = R249, etc, [italic]you[/italic] are the one who is certifiably “unhinged” or just plain thick. I repeat: Why are you ranting about “Meghan Markle”, ‘Murica and “Blacks” on a thread about Brexit? Take your bizarre (North American continent) obsessions elsewhere. You’re trying to twist British politics and make it all about US politics. You apparently can’t process the fact that the US is not front and centre in every debate, every thread and every hole.

And I find it [italic]hilarious[/italic] that you’re bizarrely trying to equate my comment upthread about the EU [italic]trans-national[/italic] budget debate (“wealth distribution” between the European Union's predominantly WHITE European separate, sovereign GOVERNMENTS - i.e. sending taxpayer money OUTSIDE your country, from one white European country to another white European country) - with the US social benefits “distribution” debate for some “black” people and immigrants (i.e. INSIDE the US - 1 solo country). You’re comparing apples and oranges, you silly person.

And I love even more that you think anyone against the EU budget wealth re-distribution is a “right-winger”. Jessica Christ, how can you be so thick? I’ll explain to you again: the main net beneficiaries of the EU budget handouts are EXACTLY right-wing, homophobic, rural, religious, casually white supremacist governments (Hungary, Poland, etc) and rural farmers (who tend to be rural, anti-gay CONSERVATIVES).

And here you are trying to lecture me: ‘Oh, not wanting to send your taxes [italic]abroad[/italic] to CONSERVATIVE, homophobic foreign governments makes you a “right-winger”!”. Even more hilariously, you equate my comment about Poland and Hungary (who are almost uniformly lilly-white and publicly demand to stay that way, refusing to accept refugees, refusing multi-culturalism or ethnic diversity) - with “blacks”. This is too ironic for words.

So tell me again, you silly person @ R249, why should my hard-earned taxes go to a HOMOPHOBIC, ultra right-wing white government in Hungary, etc that blocks EU gay legislation and is ironically building a literal wall on its border to keep refugees out? Why do [italic]you[/italic] support homophobic right-wingers? Why are you trying to shame me into funding foreign Conservative anti-gay governments?

I don’t want to pay them or have anything to do with them. If [italic]you[/italic] do, then you can wire your tax money to those right-wingers yourself.

Mon dieu, Amber Rudd, she's gone!

R249, and if you support wealth re-distribution in the EU budget so much, then here are the 'poor' foreign governments you'll be funding with your taxes. Enjoy. Since you see everything through the lens of US politics - I'll explain it to you in your vernacular: you'll be basically financing Trump.

[quote] Guardian, 2018: "No entry: Hungary's crackdown on helping refugees. The border between Hungary and Serbia is already one of the most fortified in Europe. A tall fence runs along its length, electrified, topped with thick swirls of razor wire and patrolled by police. Now, Hungarian authorities plan to go after the few people trying to help asylum seekers to navigate the system. This week parliament will debate a proposed law that could lead to activists and lawyers facing jail time for advising asylum seekers on their rights."

[quote] "And the Prime Minister was today warned by the former Director of Public Prosecutions Lord MacDonald that he could face jail if he ignored the legislation. But Cummings is said to have a "different interpretation" of the law - and reportedly told the PM at a special adviser's meeting that he didn't need to worry about the bill."

I wonder who knows more about the law, MacDonald or Cummings. Cummings, of course: let him give his version to the judge and get locked up with BoJo come the happy day.

R251 all your posts tl;dr

R255, your world education must have been hashtag "tl;dr". Because you've essentially called me a "right-winger" for not wanting to send my taxes to foreign right-wing, homophobic, white-supremacist governments. The irony must be lost on you.

"Amber Rudd resigns from cabinet and surrenders Conservative whip."

Former Labour MP Angela Smith has joined the Liberal Democrats, calling them "the strongest party to stop Brexit".

Good, Amber Rudd was often an idiot - she championed very controversial new police reporting guidelines (too wide, over-criminalisation). And, ironically, she then got slapped down and investigated under those same guidelines that she supported! #Karma.

r225 there's no irony here, you're just a xenophobic fool.

IIRC Rudd was for no-deal.

Stop projecting your own dementia on others, R260. You're the one screeching on a British politics thread: "blacks!", "Markle!". You're embarrassing yourself with your low-IQ knowledge of European politics.

And you're on a GAY forum, you "fool". Did you completely forget that? You want to send British money to aggressively HOMOPHOBIC outside regimes? Governments that BLOCK EU gay legislation? How many times do I need to repeat this to get it through your thick skull?

If [italic]you[/italic] want to fund and prop up ANTI-GAY regimes - you are an asshole and have no business being on this forum. And here money does matter - to put it in your vernacular: if [italic]you[/italic] start donating cash to homophobic Mike Pence, it [italic]matters[/italic]:

[quote] The Guardian, July 28, 2019: "2 weeks after 1.5 million people celebrated gay rights in London, marchers in the Polish city of Białystok met only rage and violence ... The brutal attack on last weekend’s equality march in the city of Białystok, in north-eastern Poland, occurred amid a GOVERNMENT CAMPAIGN to whip up homophobic feeling and fear of so-called “LGBT ideology”

Reading this thread, you'd think no-deal is now completely off the table. Not the impression I'm getting from major news outlets.

Looks like Brexit might not happen at all.

Johnson will find a way to keep the Remainers at bay until October 31st. All he has to do to succeed is run out the clock.

Sadly, yes. After which he'll probably resign, like he did after the referendum vote. Won't want to deal with the chaos.

[quote]Britain, German and France are "net contributors" to the EU budget, while Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, etc are "net beneficiaries".

This is how every single political entity works. Every single country.

Do you think that within Britain, there aren't net contributors and net beneficiaries among the cities and regions? And the EU has nothing to do with this since it's been like that for centuries?

[quote]London’s thriving economy generates a £26.5bn surplus that is recycled by the government to provide financial help to Britain’s less well-off regions, according to an official breakdown of the public finances.

Well R265, he’s setting himself up for another commons loss tom’w so good luck with that. The only clock running down now is his proroguing of Parliament from Thursday which is going to limit his options even further and make him look like an even bigger fool every day for the next 5 weeks.

I'm enjoying your description of events, r268. It's certainly enjoyable watching this truly moronic egotist get kicked in the balls on a daily (or more than daily) basis. He was always a douche.

They need to just stay in the EU.

So, now what? France may not agree to an extension.

R271 It is a remarkble feature of Brexit that in the UK a lot of people speak as if the EU will agree extension after extension without quibble. France was iffy about the last extension and may be more wary of a further extension, even if the next extension is to allow an orderly general election.

Britain is le high maintenance.

"Brexit: Boris Johnson must 'obey law', his own justice secretary reminds him in extraordinary warning."

But DL super-luvvie "Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, revealed the government hopes to win a legal fight to defeat the legislation requiring it to seek an Article 50 extension, designed to avoid a no-deal Brexit on 31 October. Vowing to “test to the limit” what the new law demands, Mr Raab said: “We will look very carefully, legally at what it requires and what it doesn’t require.”

[quote] "It now appears clear that Mr Johnson’s ‘plan B’ is not to break the law – to be given royal assent on Monday – but not to comply either. Instead, the prime minister will defy the order to delay Brexit to manufacture a case before the Supreme Court – with the Halloween deadline for crashing out just days away. Mr Raab has dismissed a warning by a former director of public prosecutions that the prime minister is heading for jail if he flouts the law as “ridiculous”. But Shami Chakrabarti, Labour’s shadow attorney general, has condemned the strategy, saying: “Is that what we say to our kids? Is that what we say to vulnerable kids? It's irresponsible and elitist.”

Manufacturing a case in court is an abuse of process in any event and it is to be hoped that the courts will recognize the abuse at the outset and dismiss whatever BoJo and his mates cook up in their bunker.

Sorry no link as this is all from The Independent whose page can be found here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-news-latest-no-deal-brexit-law-robert-buckland-a9096646.html

[quote] Britain is le high maintenance.

That's exactly what Macron's gay butler (top right, closing the window) thought when BoJo put his feet up on that table.

[quote] Headlines screaming "Supreme Court blocks Brexit" days before 31 October could further undermine the judiciary and erode the public image of this pillar of civil society.

Perhaps the Supreme Court will find that there is an issue to be decided by the European Court of Justice...

[quote] France was iffy about the last extension and may be more wary of a further extension, even if the next extension is to allow an orderly general election.

There's really no downside to the EU for granting extensions.

Their is no upside for the UK to extend this bollocks.

They could just cancel it, withdraw request to leave and re-request Brexit at some later point when everybody agrees on a solid plan. May was stupid to force a quick Brexit without a plan. But, yeah, at this point I don't see how two or even five more years of more planning would generate a better outcome.

What I don't understand: With the Tories in pieces, pushing populism to the extreme, why is no other party willing or able to stand up and gain momentum as the voice of reason? How come that Labour doesn't question Jeremy Corbyn more? Is Labor as divided as the Tories? The Liberal party should benefit and rise to the occasion, but they cannot seem to gain momentum either. Is there gridlock in every party?

I agree with this guy's blog post. He rips Boris a new one, but he's right blocking an election makes it appear as if Labour is running scared after campaigning for an election for months. I also didn't realize Corbyn's numbers were so low!

There's a bizarre cult of personality surrounding Corbyn, R279. His most ardent supporters are similar to BernieBros. They see no wrong in him . His leadership has been a disaster for Labour, but I can't see any way we're going to get rid of him any time soon. I don't understand why he keeps resisting calls to resign when he doesn't actually seem interested in becoming prime minister.

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

No party will have a majority after the next GE. It doesn't matter if Labour wins or not, what matters is the size of the opposition, as they will form a coalition "caretaker" government and provide a 2nd Ref. If the Torys are gutted by the Brexit party, that's even worse for them because they are even more entrenched in a no deal Brexit. The Torys would then never be able to form the centre of British politics again. And if a 2nd Ref returns a result of Remain, the Brexit MPs will be even more useless because they're just a one-issue party who will do nothing for their constituencies.

Even if a 2nd Ref returns a result of Leave, the Brexit MPs would be useless because they would know fuck all about trade deals or negotiating with the EU for a trade deal - that would go nowhere for years.

I really don't understand the benefit of leaving. Total load of nonsense.

BoJo will get an electoral bounce from this.

I cried this morning after watching images of MPs leaving the Commons. I'm French and I live in France. I read English at university and always admired their parliamentary system (ours is much weaker). Watching parliament effectively being shut down and the MPs of opposing sides shaking hands - I know, Mary! It feels like all we have known will never be the same again. I was in England last in June 2018 and don't know when I'm going back.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Seriously.

R285 Marie, you are not alone. I was catching up the Crown, and John Lithgow's appearance as an aging Winston Churchill to cheering crowds brought tears to my eyes. Yes I'm aware of Churchill's faults, but to see the portrayal of a genuinely popular PM in service to the queen, compared to the vulgarity today in his place was moved me.

Well, now we wait until the 19th of October to see Boris Johnson dragged out of No. 10 in chains. His premiership is like the Trump presidency on FFWD.

Was the original Brexit referendum binding? Can they just ignore it?

R286 Even after Boris became PM, I always felt that the we'd leave the EU with May's deal or something very similar. The fucking funny thing is if Labour had just voted for the damn thing in the first place, Boris wouldn't be Prime Minister right now.

No, it was not binding, R290 and technically, yes, they can ignore it. Politically, however, it looks like all of the parties agree that ignoring it is not really a viable option.

Right now, you've got a sizable minority who want to crash out without a deal in order to ... actually, I'm not sure what they think they would accomplish with a no-deal Brexit. Here in the U.S., I'd have said something like "in order to stick it to the libs." I don't what the equivalent is in the UK.

The rest of the politicians/country would like a more orderly, carefully planned approach which mitigates the harm done by leaving the EU. The trouble is that, so far, they can't get a majority to agree on just what that approach should be.

R290

Yes, because the UK is North Korea.

Do you understand what a democratic vote means?

Fucking retarded moron.

I do love our Idiot Libertarian Troll, aka r293. He can always be counted on to get it wrong. Every single time, without fail.

R293 your comment responding to r290 was unnecessarily rude and abusive. You should apologize.

R295

CUNT!

R293 is on Ignore.

[quote]The fucking funny thing is if Labour had just voted for the damn thing in the first place, Boris wouldn't be Prime Minister right now.

Exactly. It was all politically driven in order to have something to complain about. Labour has no integrity.

Britain has become a dictatorship. There is France and Germany left - not much hope for either tbh.

Is the Supreme Court likely to agree with this ruling?

Yellowhammer, "Reasonable Worst Case". 6 page pdf from gov.uk > Brexit > Humble Address Motion

I guess the UK is following the US. Pity, it was the more civilized standard bearer.

R301. The original document had “Base Scenario” meaning the minimum that was likely to happen. The government has changed that to “Reasonable Worst Case” and redacted section 15. Nothing has changed, it’s still the base case.. This government is particularly venal and dangerous. Also, six pages? That’s it? Pull the other one Gove.

r302, the UK seems to be doing a lot better than the US when it comes to accountability, country before party, and national responsibility--unlike the GOP, which doesn't even care that Russia hacks US elections. I'd say the UK is currently doing a damn sight better than the US.

As predicted, BoJo gets a bounce from recent events. Seems as if the public blames parliament for the mess. I posted above that Corbyn, the opposition and brexiteers hadn't thought this through and were eager to score quick early blows in a marathon fight. The tories, purged of moderates, will win the election, whenever it's held, no-deal is inevitable. BoJo will live to see a full term as PM.

Boris lied to the Queen. She'll have him for that.

Her Majesty took Winston Churchill and brought him to heel when he lied to her, God only knows what she's going to do to a nobody like Boris. She's a nice old lady but nobody's fool and she won't stand for a PM lying to her about her business.

The country doesn't like him lying to the Queen either. He'll have to answer for it.

Can those old Leavers just die already, Jesus fucking Christ.

Despite suffering six consecutive defeats in the Commons, BoJo's popularity and approval rating is increasing. Might as well start preparing because no-deal is inevitable.

Oh, I wouldn't count your chickens before their hatched, scumbag troll @ R308.

BoJo to defy parliament as he refuses to discuss membership extension beyond October 31st with Juncker. It's done. He could get stripped of power, thrown in prison or whatever, but no one can prevent the UK crashing out at the end of October.

Parliament could negotiate the extension without BoJo.

Parliament could do a vote of confidence and have the Queen install Corbyn as prime minister, right. Then he can halt Brexit. Not saying it's likely, but it's possible, isn't it?

That won't happen.

BoJo mocked and humiliated in Europe

"Boris, ha!

It's very worrying that the string of humiliations and defeats inflicted on Boris have only solidified his support. Polls aren't slipping even a bit.

Another defeat looming for BoJo.

Jeremy Corbyn positioning himself as sensible man above the fray. Privately many say he's no fan of the EU himself.

Corbyn:

[quote]We are the only UK-wide party ready to put our trust in the people of Britain to make the decision. Johnson wants to crash out with no deal. That is something opposed by business, industry, the trade unions and most of the public – and even by the Vote Leave campaign’s co-convener Michael Gove, who said earlier this year: “We didn’t vote to leave without a deal.”

[quote]And now the Liberal Democrats want MPs to overturn the referendum result by revoking article 50 in a parliamentary stitch-up. It is simply undemocratic to override the decision of a majority of the voters without going back to the people.

Are the Lib Dems really going to run on reversing Brexit? Will it work?

It very well might, R319. No one want Corbyn, and Conservatives are already crossing over to the Libs.

Why do British politicians have such wacky hair?

So r320, you're willing to put money on Jo Swinson being Prime Minister? Is that realistic? It's certainly not showing in the polls.

BoJo has two weeks to come up with alternative backstop plan. I feel the opposition miscalculated taking for granted that the EU would grant another extension.

Thanks for that, r323. “We both agreed that it is now time for Boris Johnson to produce his own proposals in writing – if they exist. If no proposals are received by the end of September, then it’s over.”

I haven't seen a country fuck itself this hard since the US elected Trump.

The DUP have softened their position a bit. I think May's deal might yet pass.

If May's deal passes, what would it say about MPs who voted it down, like how many times?

That they reconsidered when they realized it was either that or a no-deal Brexit, which would be an even bigger disaster.

[Quote] I haven't seen a country fuck itself this hard since the US elected Trump.

They see it as the next phase after liberal democracy. Putin says as much. Let's see if they are right.

'The men who plundered Europe': bankers on trial for siphoning €60bn

This is the future role of Britain if the conservatives win. No more the world's champion of democracy, even in name only. But a laundromat and a haven for thieves.

Labour divisions over brexit coming to the fore. Talk about self sabotage.

R330 Typical of the liberal left

The UK Supreme Court just smacked Boris down with no pity. Parliament was proroged unlawfully.

What now, Brit Dataloungers? And well done! At least the reps of your government have a spine.

That's a stunning setback for Boris.

[quote]The court unanimously declared "the Prime Minister's advice to Her Majesty was unlawful, void and of no effect" when he asked the Queen to suspend parliament.

[quote]The decision "had the effect of frustrating or preventing" parliament from carrying out its functions, it said, and was like "a blank sheet of paper".

[quote]The court decided that the suspension of parliament essentially never happened at all.

...

[quote]Because the suspension was ruled unlawful, parliament is technically still in session, as if the whole thing had never happened. The decision from 11 judges was unanimous.

[quote]Parliament could be reconvened straight away.

[quote]In its summary, the court said that how that happens is up to the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, and his counterpart in the House of Lords.

Bercow is already taking action:

[quote]Bercow says the citizens of the UK are entitled to expect that parliament performs its function.

[quote]He says he has instructed his officials to prepare for the resumption of the work of the Commons. It is not a recall of parliament, he says, because parliament was not properly prorogued.

[quote]He says he wants it to sit tomorrow at 11.30am.

Well done Britain!

Now will Boris ask for another shut down of the parliament as he said he might? Will he be able to ask the queen again under these circs?

How in the world could he ask for a second shutdown after this? I seriously doubt he would try that.

There was never any suspension at all.

What a huge fuck-up BoJo is! LMFAO!

Where's our Brexit/Boris troll these days?

Looks like they'll be throwing Cummings under the bus. The knives are out all over Twitter. And in other places, as well.

The Supreme Court justices were unanimous ... BoJo is crushed.

If I were Theresa May I would be laughing my ass off at this point.

So Boris made the queen do something illegal. Hmm.

I keep thinking British politics can't get anymore chaotic, and then...

At least the rule of law is reinstated.

I'm not Theresa May R343 but I certainly am.

Always hoped Johnson would go down as a footnote in history as the shortest term in office. Maybe I'll actually get my wish.

Yes, here's hoping, r347. What a fool he is.

I don't think Boris is going to resign. He has no shame. He'll just bang on about how he was only trying to uphold the will of the people, etc.

r349, if that's the case, and he won't resign, when can they get rid of him and put in someone with a semblance of actual capability?

R350 - well, Theresa May clung on to her job for a full three years, despite her complete incompetence. I don't think the Tories will be getting rid of BoJo anytime soon. I wish they would, though. I'd love to see him face the humiliation of quickly losing the job he's hankered after for so many years.

R350, a vote of no confidence would likely do it but the opposition isn't on board with that just yet, as they haven't coalesced around a position and a leader.

There doesn't seem to be enough humiliation inflicted on this bozo BoJo, does there? I love it.

The Guardian Live Blog continues to be a good source of information. Some answers to questions from readers:

Question: "Is it not incumbent on Corbyn to move a vote of no confidence in the government tomorrow? It would look particularly craven if he shies away from it this time, as it would be virtually guaranteed to pass."

[quote]No. Only the leader of the opposition can table a no confidence motion that has to be put to a vote, but other opposition parties, independent MPs and rebel Tories would only vote for one if they knew it would lead to a new government led by a PM they would find acceptable. The Lib Dems don’t want to make Jeremy Corbyn PM, and there is no support at the moment for anyone else to lead an interim government.

[quote]Under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, there would be 14 days after a vote of no confidence to allow time for another government to win a confidence vote. During that period Johnson would remain as PM. Assuming no other PM emerged, after 9 October parliament would be dissolved pending an election. Under electoral law there would have to be 25 working days before polling day - which would mean an election in November.

[quote]Theoretically the Benn Act means that, if the UK is heading for a no-deal Brexit on 31 October, Boris Johnson would have to request an extension. But Johnson has signalled that he wants to find a way around this, and even if he puts in a request, it is not certain that the EU will say yes.

[quote]In short, if the opposition passed a vote of no confidence now, there would be some risk of a no-deal Brexit on 31 October.

Maybe Boris can appeal to the European Court of Justice to overturn this..?

[quote]So Boris made the queen do something illegal.

Pardon my ignorance. Isn't the Queen able to go to the Supreme Court herself to ask for a judgment if she thinks the action demanded of her may be illegal?

R356 As a rule, the Queen can only encourage, advise and warn. Taking her own prime minister to justice would appear to be way off limits: anyway, she didn't have to; others did it and won.

BoJo the Clown has lasted 62 days so far. He must do neaely the same again to beat the record of the shortest prime ministerial tenure (George Canning's 119 days in 1827). BoJo is such a moron.

Gina Miller: [quote] “As a child of the Commonwealth, I had been brought up to believe Great Britain was the promised land, a culture where the rule of law was observed and decency was embedded in the national fabric.”

"In July, Rhodri Philipps, the fourth Viscount St Davids, was jailed for 12 weeks for directing “extreme racial abuse” at her and offering money to anyone who would run over and kill Miller."

[quote]BoJo the Clown has lasted 62 days so far.

How many Scaramuccis is that?

The revisionist bullshitting makes me sick. A majority voted to exit, come what may. They're all fools. It's no wonder no one respects or trusts politicians.

The UK really is becoming a shithole.

Yeah, R361, we'll definitely take seriously someone who wrote:

[quote]I don't see how it goes to the court and, if it does, the court will confirm that proroguing is a legitimate, if nuclear, course of action open to a government.

And the UK keeps morphing into Italy. There’s not enough popcorn in the world for this shitshow clusterfuck.

Can we pause briefly to appreciate Lady Hale, who accessorised her outfit today with a fabulous, huge diamond spider.

Can parliamentary leaders request an audience with the queen?

R366 Yes, any privy councillor can.

....

[quote] Boris Johnson has called the Queen from New York after Supreme Court defeat

Perhaps Boris would like to resume his US citizenship (which he renounced in 2016) and stay in NYC where he was born on that baleful day back in 1964.

Assault on a Queen

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

so long as the news assigns with what you want to near, eh?

So what happens if nobody takes any action anymore before November? Do the UK leave without a deal, with the May deal or don't leave at all? Parliament says it's illegal to leave without a deal. BJ doesn't get a new deal though, and the May deal was never approved by the UK, only by the EU. What would happen on 10/31 at the status quo?

So what happens if nobody takes any action anymore before November?

That can’t happen- a bill has been passed by Parliament mandating the PM by law to seek an extension from the EU to January 31. The EU have said they will agree to this.

Do the UK leave without a deal, with the May deal or don't leave at all?

It will remain in the EU until January 31. Boris has indicated he will ignore law at some points in last month. If he did the judiciary would step in and bind him to extend. If he still refused he would likely be dismissed by HM.

Parliament says it's illegal to leave without a deal. BJ doesn't get a new deal though, and the May deal was never approved by the UK, only by the EU. What would happen on 10/31 at the status quo?

Your scenario sets out a “no deal” Brexit but it legally can’t happen unless EU weirdly refused an extension - then maybe UK could crash out. This would mean tariffs on WTO rules overnight and the UK becoming a “third country”.

Boris is doubling down. Like Trump. All sociopaths do that.

Thanks for explaining, r375. I didn't know the law also requires to file for an extension. Missed that little piece.

Just to point out the country was promised the referendum result would be respected. [bold]NON-BINDING[/bold] notwithstanding.

[quote]I don't see how it goes to the court and, if it does, the court will confirm that proroguing is a legitimate, if nuclear, course of action open to a government.

r17 You were wrong, as you usually are. Prorogation can be dictatorial. The Supreme Court slapped down Boris the Pig. Much to your sorrow, I'm sure.

No, R378. One prime minister said that, well after the non-binding referendum was held. There was no "promise."

BoJo referred to police watchdog over Jennifer Arcuri allegations

The prime minister said it who was prime minister during the referendum, who called the referendum and no prime minister who followed ever said they would not respect it. You're a fantasist, R380, and illustrate beautifully the crux of the problem in the UK. Damn weasels like you. You are destroying faith in government and politics for a generation and you're terribly, terribly cavalier about democracy.

Sorry, R382, but no amount of whining will change the irrefutable fact that it was a non-binding referendum, as that was "promise." The "fantasist" here is you.

As for the rest of your post, it only warrants one word: "MARY!"

Get a grip. And a life.

Sorry, reverse those words: "as was that 'promise.'"

Revoke the article 50 notice: on the grounds that Brexit is an intractable problem, for now, given the Irish question.

Elections would give Tory/Brexit coalition a comfortable majority.

The shenanigans are making it more likely for Hard Brexit.

When the Tories win the election, they will redo whatever any caretaker government tries to undo.

The ultimatum delivered to the European Union today makes a hard Brexit quite likely.

The ultimatum delivered to the European Union today makes a hard Brexit quite likely.

Yes, it's now up to the courts to intervene.

Hard Brexit is now highly likely.

Unless the Remainers can somehow offer an alternative in the next 28 days (Hahahhahaha) then on All Hallows Day the UK will be independent again.

They know that a second referendum would result in an even higher percentage of people voting to leave the dying EU.

Nope, there are still the courts, which are there to ensure the Benn Act is upheld. It is the will of the sovereign parliament that the UK not leave the EU without a deal and the courts will make sure that doesn't happen via any shenanigans Boris might come up with. You can forget about loopholes as well, because you know the UK courts just loooove those.

And speaking of dying, the demographics are definitely on the Remainers' side.

[quote] And speaking of dying, the demographics are definitely on the Remainers' side.

People are living longer in Britain than ever, R392. (That's why there's an NHS crisis.) If anyone is counting on Leave voters to simply pass away, they're in for a big disappointment and a LOOONG (potentially decade-long) wait.

Just like Prince Charles, eternally waiting for QEII to finally hand him the crown. Philip is 98, and Liz is 93 - and still kicking :).

Demographic studies focusing on Brexit don't support your assertion in the slightest. You're simply wrong on this one.

And in somewhat related news, I'm always suspicious of posters who post in one thread only. That's not a red flag at all.

The UK will be out before demographics change enough to make a difference. Johnson's deal has enough Labour and DUP support to pass Westminster and, facing recession, the pragmatists of the EU (principally Mutti), will see it passed too. At last, a successful path for Britain out of the over governed, undemocratic EU.

Who are you even talking to, R395? I post in multiple threads.

And in related news, regarding your statement ("Can those old Leavers just die already, Jesus fucking Christ.") - No, they won't.

You can pray to "Jesus Christ" for people to die off to free up more space in NHS hospitals too - but that's not forthcoming either, even if it would be help with the NHS deficit.

[quote] This is how every single political entity works. Every single country. Do you think that within Britain, there aren't net contributors and net beneficiaries among the cities and regions?

R267, to finally respond to you: the EU is not a "country" - so no point comparing it to a "country", where everyone is subject to the same laws. It's a collection of countries, some with very different laws. Personally, I don't want to be in a union with countries like Hungary, Romania, etc that openly attack gay pride parades. I have nothing "in common" with such rabid RULING politicians abroad (who make even the Tories look like progressives by comparison). And I don't want to subsidise such politicians abroad anymore via EU handouts.

Poland and Hungary have been in the "Union" since 2004 (almost 16 YEARS now), Romania & Bulgaria since 2007 (almost 12 years) - and they STILL reject gay marriage like it's an abomination and instead promote extreme Catholicism and heckle gay pride parades. They pocket EU funds and then turn around and laugh at EU requests for "marriage equality". Enough with the waiting already. They had 2 decades of EU giving them money to embrace humans rights and they still won't budge (in fact it seems they're digging their heels in - they won't even at least recognise "civil partnerships" among gays). If they don't want to enact gay marriage equality (i.e. human rights) laws immediately - then I don't want to subsidise their GDP anymore.

It's now becoming clear that they just joined to selfishly suck money out of other countries - but they don't want to join in the human-rights SPIRIT of the Union. And it's now become clear the EU is powerless to do anything about it or to even sanction them (they simply veto the sanctions). Well, if those countries don't abide by the spirit of the Union, don't implement humanitarian quid-pro-quo legislative changes for the generous money $$$ they get (and instead just spread homophobic rhetoric in the EU), and can't even be sanctioned for such human rights violations (because the EU admits it's toothless & can't resolve such tensions) - then I don't want to be in a "union" with them anymore, or hand such homophobic ruling politicians any taxpayer money.

[quote] Time, July 3, 2019: "As support for LGBTQ rights has grown, so too has the backlash. Ahead of European Parliament elections in May, Poland’s right-wing RULING "Law and Justice" party (PiS), ramped UP its opposition to the LGBTQ community, calling it a “direct attack” on family values. PiS, which has been in power since 2015, warned that if the opposition prevailed in the European Parliament elections, so would the LGBTQ “attack” on society (PiS eventually scored a victory in the May elections). Jacek Kucharczyk, President of Poland’s leading think tank, the Institute of Public Affairs tells TIME he expects anti-LGBTQ rhetoric to increase ahead of national elections this fall."

[quote] "Anti-gay attacks are NOT considered a hate crime by [Polish] law. In 2016, parliament REJECTED a bill that would have included gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, and age as potential grounds for a “hate crime.” Kucharczyk from the Institute of Public Affairs says there’s a “REFUSAL to recognise that LGBTQ people need to be protected. This group is systematically excluded. Hate crimes against sexual minorities are not reported because police are NOT required to report it.”

Rumour has it the government is on the verge of securing a deal. Hold me, David!