placeholder

The UK fishing industry already had taken a clobbering due to 2 factors: overfishing and the cod wars. Who killed the British fishing industry? https://www.investmentmonitor.ai/sectors/agribusiness/who-killed-the-british-fishing-industry/

That phrase can legitimately be used when someone offers no evidence but only an unbacked opinion. I've offered evidence. It's your reply, which runs contrary to that fact, that has got no substance to it.

Why don't you understand that those laws are shackles around the wrists of Brexiters that might it extremely difficult for them to note what those laws might be.

I'm basing my predictions on actual current evidence. It's JonnyF who can read minds situated in the future.

A few polls? Every one of the dots on this graph is a poll: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_the_United_Kingdom_rejoining_the_European_Union_(2020–present) CORRECTION: Divide the number of dots by 3 to get an accurate count of the polls. Still not most people's idea of "a few".

Except actual evidence. It's you who claim you can read minds located in the future.

It's not Biden who is threatening a debt ceiling crisis. Out of all the countries in the developed world, only America has this debt ceiling limitation. Let's hope that the 14 Amendment puts an end to this nonsense.

Coudn't find what you referred to. But when it's a matter of a few polls you might have a point. But when virtually all polls support a trend, that's a different matter.

I have current evidence. Your evidence is based on your imagination. And the 'you've got nothing" was used in relation to evidence. Your reply was utterly irrelevant. And your reference to scotland is another irrelevancy. In other words, you've still got nothing,.

Let us know when the trends change to conform to what your crystal ball has shown you. Until, then, you've got nothing.

On evidence developed by the Inspector General of the Justice Dept. (And it's Clinesmith.) And the charge was about as minor as a felony can be.

Fishing. Right I'm sure your concern on their behalf is sincere.. The UK fishing industry was clobbered by Brexit because the fresh fish industry now has to pass through time-delaying EU customs regulations to export fish. As for small businesses: Brexit has clobbered smaller businesses https://www.economist.com/britain/2022/04/30/brexit-has-clobbered-smaller-businesses I remember back in the day when Brexit supporters were claimng that no barriers to trade would be imposed because it would hurt the EU more than the UK and that such countries as Germany couldn't afford to imperil auto sales to the UK. The former claim never even passed an arithmetic test and it turned out the Germany wasn't in it solely for the money.

Support for reunification is already at just about 50%. Are you projecting that God is going to exempt UK's aged from the usual course of mortality so that it will take another 18 years until there are enough voters to support a referendum? And keep in mind that there are a lot o "don't knows". Folks who most likely take less of an interest in the topic and are less likely to vote.

First off, it was the Inspector General of the Justice Dept who developed the case against Clinesmith. Not Durham. He turned the package of evidence over to Durham. And Clinesmith was what's called a line lawyer, the lowest rung on the attorney hierarchy in the Justice Dept. And, no, he didn't change emails. He changed one email. And that was to spare himself some effort. As the judge noted: “My view of the evidence is that Mr. Clinesmith likely believed that what he said about Mr. Page was true,” Boasberg said. “By altering the email, he was saving himself some work and taking an inappropriate shortcut.” https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/29/fbi-lawyer-trump-russia-probe-email-463750

No. That's not the case. This report only addresses the FBI and regular DOJ investigation. The report that addresses that issue is the Mueller report. And that report found that if Trump were not President he could be prosecuted on 10 counts including obstruction of justice in the case of the Russia investigation. And, as it turns out, he pardoned those who might have been in a position to incriminate him.

Of course we already know. There's nothing significant in this report that the Justice Dept. Inspector General didn't already uncover and report on. That's the report that Durham announced he disagreed with while he was pursuing his investigation. Attorney General William Barr alleged the same thing.. He believed, like Barr, that the Justice Dept had political motives for investigating the Russian connection. Like the Inspector General, Durham found nothing to confirm this. In fact, the only 2 cases his team developed and brought to trial were against defendants who Durham claimed lied to the FBI. In other words, according to Durham, FBI agents were victims not perpetrators. Does it need to be mentioned again that he lost both cases? That the only conviction he secured was based entirely on evidence gathered by the Justice Dept. Inspector General? That's the same person whose report Durham and Barr publicly cast doubt on. And it should be noted, that unlike Barr, who lied about Mueller's report and was castigated by the judge for doing that, Merrick Garland let this report be released in its entirety and without making any comment on it, much less lie about it.

Best to wait a bit longer until the demand is overwhelming. Then hold another referendum. The trend lines are clear.

Because the demographics favor your contention?

I was inclined to disbelieve Comer until I saw this: Marjorie Taylor Greene Insists Biden Whistleblower Not Missing Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has said that a whistleblower in a GOP investigation into the Biden family is not missing. "Just to be clear. Our whistle blower for Joe Biden is not missing," Greene, who is on the House Oversight Committee, tweeted. Her tweet was in response to a clip of Rep. James Comer, the committee's chairman, saying in an interview on Sunday that Republicans had lost track of the primary informant in a probe into the Biden family's involvement in an alleged bribery scheme. https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-insists-whistleblower-not-missing-biden-family-probe-1800237 Not easy to choose between inveterate liars.

Well, as I noted the level of support for rejoining is now around 50%. And as you noted, that number will only increase with time. Labour can wait a while. And start being a whole lot more accommodating and friendly with the EU. There are also politically speaking even pressing needs like restoring the NHS.

Given that all the polls show that those who want to rejoin are almost at a consistent absolute majority and those who want to remain are increasingly far behind, the trends point to a virtually inevitable result.

According to JonnyF this means it's inevitable that a growing majority of UK citizens will be UK haters. I do wonder how long Brexit can survive given that this majority will only grow over time.

As usual, when someone's got nothing, they go to motive. Because, you know, while you can't prove motive you can't disprove it either. And since 48% of UK voters voted to remain, were they also rejoicing in the subjugation of the UK by the Franco German alliance? And the polls consistently show now that a majority of UK citizens think that leaving the EU was a mistake. Let me amend that: a majority of UK citizens hate the UK so much that they think that leaving the EU was a mistake.

You're "perhaps" says it all. If he was a guy who spoke his mind and your suggestion was his reason he would he would have said so. iOr if you thought a federal law was a good idea and he was a guy who spoke his mind he would have said that. But instead he waffled around the question.

Really? Then how come Mr. "id" avoided giving a straight answer to the question about would he support a Federal ban on abortion? As for recycling issues, what do you call Trump's obsession with the 2020 election? If that's not recycling, what is?