Johnson will ask for Brexit delay after losing parliament vote -EU official

[evadgib]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

They’re somewhat reduced in number.

As were the IRA until internment was introduced.

(think about it)

[soalbundy]

Just now, evadgib said:

As were the IRA until internment was introduced.

(think about it)

They are waiting for the second coming, it will be quicker than waiting for brexit

[evadgib]

4 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

The Law doesn't depend on your political views, nor your, mine or anyone else's views on Brexit.

 

Johnson has clearly treated the law with contempt, the courts with contempt and parliamentary sovereignty with contempt. That is disgraceful and totally unacceptable in a constitutional democracy.

 

There can never be a situation where the PM puts himself/herself above the Law, just because you or anyone else doesn't like the law or thinks the end justifies the means.

 

Johnson must be punishes for his silly schoolboy antics.

What punishment is there for fully complying with a mickey mouse law in work-to-rule fashion, especially one in breech of a historic international convention of which UK is a signatory?

[DannyCarlton]

11 minutes ago, evadgib said:

What punishment is there for fully complying with a mickey mouse law in work-to-rule fashion, especially one in breech of a historic international convention of which UK is a signatory?

Would that be akin to Johnson threatening both the EU and Parliament to crash the UK out of Europe without a deal if they didn't acceed to his hotchpotch of a "May minus" BRINO deal?

[Opl]

37 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

You were very clearly informed before the Brexit vote. The choice was binary, you either voted to leave the EU or you voted to stay. It could not be any more simple. The whole concept of BRINO (Brexit in name only) only started being used when the losers in the referendum couldn't face reality. Nobody in the 2016 voted for BRINO, and I still find the BRINO concept totally ridiculous.

I'd rather say, voters were- maybe - informed of  "Remain" + and - because it's the reality they are living in, but could only have a virtual version of the Leave Promises, so voters were half-informed if not misinformed. And so are the rest of the EU citizens who did not vote.   

[sandyf]

On 10/20/2019 at 3:24 PM, Basil B said:

Well I see charges now of, "Contempt of Parliament" although he may have found loopholes in the hastily conceived Benn act, he knew of its intentions and the views of Parliament in bringing this law that he may have circumvented with in the law but he has clearly been disobedient of Parliament's wishes. 

 

Parliament The Commons has the power to charge him with and can suspend or expel him.

  

You could well be right, the Benn act was quite specific in that the PM must request the extension. The text of the letter is laid out in the act so on the face of it could only be construed as legal with the PM's signature.

However the EU appear to have accepted the letter at face value and as far as they are concerned a delay is far more acceptable than rejection.

[el torro]

1 hour ago, maxpower said:

No consequence?

Correct me if wrong but the leaflet appears to have gone with the worst scenario. I imagine anything more would have required visits to the Gypsy tent.

 

Don't expect 'remainers' to understand how the worst possible scenario was played out to the electorate (even in a govt. leaflet sent to every household!) - and yet they still voted leave.

[david555]

The possibility's for coming days 

 

[DannyCarlton]

28 minutes ago, el torro said:

Don't expect 'remainers' to understand how the worst possible scenario was played out to the electorate (even in a govt. leaflet sent to every household!) - and yet they still voted leave.

And 60 million fake facebook messages decrying the leaflet as "project fear".

[dunroaming]

On 10/20/2019 at 1:49 AM, MarineEquine said:

It was a bad deal. The UK would still have been subservient to the EUSSR. No Deal is better than a bad deal. 

Well it is certainly a poor deal for the UK and quite a good one for the EU.  You would think the ERG and hard line Brexiteers would be fighting this deal tooth and nail. They did May's deal.  And yet they are not and the blame for the delay (stall) is placed at the remainers door.  But I think that the Letwin amendment helps Boris's deal.  Nobody trusts Johnson to play a straight bat and rightly so.  But if the amendment really takes no-deal off of the table I believe people will (reluctantly) vote it through.

 

It isn't a hard Brexit and not a ridiculously soft one either.  It shows that it wasn't possible to get a better deal than May got without selling the DUP down the river.  Exactly what Boris has done.  Farage is screaming that it isn't Brexit at all but that idiot would do.

 

So I think the deal will go through and the champagne corks will be popping in Brussels.  The pound will strengthen somewhat but not by that much because we are still a long way off of agreeing free trade deals.

 

[Forethat]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

They’re somewhat reduced in number.

Care to wager?

 

IF there is a second referendum and Remain wins, I'll log out of TVF never to return again. If Leave wins you leave TVF for good.

 

Deal?

[dunroaming]

6 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Care to wager?

 

IF there is a second referendum and Remain wins, I'll log out of TVF never to return again. If Leave wins you leave TVF for good.

 

Deal?

Well I would take that wager ????

 

The constant argument seems to be that the people all want to leave and a few remain politicians are stopping that from happening.  The argument for the other side is that people have changed their minds now they know the reality of what Brexit means.  That is then countered by the claim that if there was a second referendum even more people would vote to leave!

 

Only one way to find out but it appears the Brexiteers are too frit to test it.  I wonder why?

[el torro]

25 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Well I would take that wager ????

The constant argument seems to be that the people all want to leave and a few remain polit????e Brexiteers are too frit to test it.  I wonder why?

If the (mostly remainer) MPs were confident that another referendum would deliver the result they prefer, they would have agreed to another referendum.

 

Unlike remainers on this forum, they're obviously not at all confident.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

You were very clearly informed before the Brexit vote. The choice was binary, you either voted to leave the EU or you voted to stay. It could not be any more simple. The whole concept of BRINO (Brexit in name only) only started being used when the losers in the referendum couldn't face reality. Nobody in the 2016 voted for BRINO, and I still find the BRINO concept totally ridiculous.

The whole concept of ‘No Deal Brexit’ started as a threat against the EU to get a deal.

 

Well for the second time there’s a deal and for the second time the PM of the day can’t get it through the UK’s sovereign Parliament.

 

Maybe it’s a bad deal.

[Chomper Higgot]

53 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Care to wager?

 

IF there is a second referendum and Remain wins, I'll log out of TVF never to return again. If Leave wins you leave TVF for good.

 

Deal?

What and miss all the fun?!

 

No I’ll not take your wager, I’ve also got an eye on  the treasonous Trump pie that is cooking nicely.

 

With a bit of luck both illiberal coups will collapse at the same time.

[JAG]

1 hour ago, Forethat said:

Care to wager?

 

IF there is a second referendum and Remain wins, I'll log out of TVF never to return again. If Leave wins you leave TVF for good.

 

Deal?

"Deal?" is an unfortunate turn of phrase given the circumstances. If it looks as if either of you are going to have to leave, Oliver Letwin will table an amendment to the wager, Gina Miller will dust off her modest but still quite hot outfit and present herself to a magistrates court in the Isle of Wight to ask for it to be stopped, and some hitherto unknown Unionist politician will bellow "ULSTER SAYS NO"!

 

PS - this is not intended as a serious political commentary - or is it?

[el torro]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The whole concept of ‘No Deal Brexit’ started as a threat against the EU to get a deal.

 

Well for the second time there’s a deal and for the second time the PM of the day can’t get it through the UK’s sovereign Parliament.

 

Maybe it’s a bad deal.

I've no doubt you're right, but EU politicians were (yet again....) happy to endorse the 'deal'.  So it could only be a bad deal for the UK.

 

Not that I think this has anything to do with the farce of the last few days..

 

And, funnily enough, the EU is trying to pretend that they will not immediately provide yet another extension - if the EU/Boris deal isn't approved by MPs.

[Opl]

17 minutes ago, el torro said:

If the (mostly remainer) MPs were confident that another referendum would deliver the result they prefer, they would have agreed to another referendum.

 

Unlike remainers on this forum, they're obviously not at all confident.

A useful referendum would be to get answers of the voters about the compromise they'd agree to get a deal - and a good deal, for actually, what the UK wants is contradictory:

At the same time:

1/ Brexit, that is to say a border between the UK and the EU

2/ no border between Eire(part of the EU) and Ulster (out of the EU)

3/ no difference between Ulster and the rest of the UK.

Vote, decide, approve or reject, then ask the EU for a delay, and stop blaming the EU for UK's contradictions   

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, evadgib said:

What punishment is there for fully complying with a mickey mouse law in work-to-rule fashion, especially one in breech of a historic international convention of which UK is a signatory?

I’m not sure why you regard laws passed in Britain’s Parliament as ‘micky mouse’.

 

A very odd view for a Brexiteer to express.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, JAG said:

"Deal?" is an unfortunate turn of phrase given the circumstances. If it looks as if either of you are going to have to leave, Oliver Letwin will table an amendment to the water, Gina Miller will dust off her modest but still quite hot outfit and present herself to a magistrates court in the Isle of Wight to ask for it to be stopped, and some unknown Unionists politician will bellow "ULSTER SAYS NO"!

 

PS - this is not intended as a serious political commentary - or is it?

There’s always a first.

[david555]

8 minutes ago, el torro said:

I've no doubt you're right, but EU politicians were (yet again....) happy to endorse the 'deal'.  So it could only be a bad deal for the UK.

 

Not that I think this has anything to do with the farce of the last few days..

 

And, funnily enough, the EU is trying to pretend that they will not immediately provide yet another extension - if the EU/Boris deal isn't approved by MPs.

I think E.U. shall try to squeeze for  a referendum guarantee conditionally for  the extension granting , if the  deal is not approved ….

[Mavideol]

3 minutes ago, el torro said:

I've no doubt you're right, but EU politicians were (yet again....) happy to endorse the 'deal'.  So it could only be a bad deal for the UK.

 

Not that I think this has anything to do with the farce of the last few days..

 

And, funnily enough, the EU is trying to pretend that they will not immediately provide yet another extension - if the EU/Boris deal isn't approved by MPs.

BJ told the EU to wait a couple days before accepting his extension request, it's the usual BJ  game  playing run down the clock

[evadgib]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m not sure why you regard laws passed in Britain’s Parliament as ‘micky mouse’.

 

A very odd view for a Brexiteer to express.

 

You can pretend all you like but you know exactly what I mean and would be in agreeance had it been Miller-esque in reverse.

 

Here's an example of a bloke working for Bliar when PM painting Boris in exactly the same manner this morning...

 

[dunroaming]

4 minutes ago, evadgib said:

You can pretend all you like but you know exactly what I mean and would be in agreeance had it been Miller-esque in reverse.

 

Here's an example of a bloke working for Bliar painting Boris in exactly the same manner...

 

No body trusts Johnson.  He has proved to be a dodgy con-man who lies at the drop of a hat.  Kind of like an Arthur Daley character on heat (literally) 

[evadgib]

4 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

No body trusts Johnson.  He has proved to be a dodgy con-man who lies at the drop of a hat.  Kind of like an Arthur Daley character on heat (literally) 

He hasn't lied us into war yet though eh? Bliar's follies resulted in the loss of almost 700 lives & countless more injured.

[JAG]

3 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

No body trusts Johnson.  He has proved to be a dodgy con-man who lies at the drop of a hat.  Kind of like an Arthur Daley character on heat (literally) 

A remarkable comment - given the context linking it to Alistair Campbell and Tony Blair!

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The whole concept of ‘No Deal Brexit’ started as a threat against the EU to get a deal.

 

Well for the second time there’s a deal and for the second time the PM of the day can’t get it through the UK’s sovereign Parliament.

 

Maybe it’s a bad deal.

No. The possibility of ‘no deal’ is inferred within Article 50.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Mavideol said:

BJ told the EU to wait a couple days before accepting his extension request, it's the usual BJ  game  playing run down the clock

He knew everyone would be watching the rugby anyway.

[Rookiescot]

Johnson is screwed.

A Scottish court has just upheld a complaint against him saying he must comply with the Benn act.

Failure to do so will result in him being held in contempt of court.

We face the prospect of this useless article called Johnson being jailed for his petty antics.

This is the gift that keeps on giving.

There is not going to be a no deal Brexit.

Indeed I seriously suspect there will be NO Brexit at all.

Suck it up guys.

[Forethat]

4 hours ago, dunroaming said:

Well I would take that wager ????

 

The constant argument seems to be that the people all want to leave and a few remain politicians are stopping that from happening.  The argument for the other side is that people have changed their minds now they know the reality of what Brexit means.  That is then countered by the claim that if there was a second referendum even more people would vote to leave!

 

Only one way to find out but it appears the Brexiteers are too frit to test it.  I wonder why?

Funny you should mention that minutes before Berkow announces whether he'll allow the house to vote on BJs deal. It appears the Hard Remainers are too frit to test it.  I wonder why?