nauseus

"Appear to hold the belief which appears common amongst Brexiters"! Well, from that, it appears to me that you appear to have no idea what I believe. However, I will agree that neither party had a plan, mainly because those in power believed that a no vote was forthcoming. Initially, elements of the UK Gov foolishly expected to get far more from the EU than was going to be given from the more belligerent elements within the EU. Then again, there are no exit plans or arrangements set out in the Treaty of Lisbon, anyway.

The EU had plenty of time to offer this "similar" type of deal before Article 50 was triggered.

I didn't fall for Johnson or Farage. Promise.

We'll probably never know what truly might have been "on the the table". May was trying to act tough, failed, then soon changed her tune, eventually going to Merkel in the wee hours to return with with the lousy "Chequers Agreement" (as dictated by the EU and that few in the UK cabinet agreed with). The other, more relevant cause of friction was, of course, the belligerent EU, itself.

But RINOs are really republicans?

I think I used the "witchunt" word but not "bogus" (although probably also true in most cases). But feel free to show me this elusive post that I apparently made.

That status has taken decades to develop and was not offered to the UK anyway.

Cherry-picking individual years again. Tsk tsk.

If you try comprehending what I said, then you might avoid making such obtuse comments.

Great to see I'm being monitored! You're partly right, I won't refute or agree with the charges brought against Trump because the full truth of these needs to be revealed.

OK then. But I will be sure to avoid your propaganda first.

Just wake up then?

Such dribble.

At it again. You just can't stop can you?

You're welcome.

Again, you are trying to directly connect one thing to another. Poor form, because like that you can create more angst than you think there is to start with, just to suit your own narrative.

No! Read what I said properly. I don't bother with FOX. Pointless here.

Sounds like a good fallback for prosecutors with no real evidence.

You are linking two stories that are not directly linked between themselves. Poor form.

Mediaite? Looking at the LATEST NEWS IN POLITICS AND MEDIA it all seems to have a rather similar theme, a bit like the favorites from this Navigator Research lot. Can't you find anything a bit less obviously biased? Guess not. I'll pass.

Why not lead the way then?

As the first two are likely and the third is apparently a possibility, then Trump has a better than even chance of winning then.

No. Considering the amount of "coincidental" events going on right now.

How could they possibly be any lower?

But the big poo is yet to be revealed.