[Beren]

I'm sure that Rich would agree with you, a case of, 'imitation is a sincere form of flattery', no doubt.

I wonder in what mysterious ways this makes sense, but making sense doesn't make sense in Brexitland anyway.

[Nonsense]

I wonder in what mysterious ways this makes sense, but making sense doesn't make sense in Brexitland anyway.

If you understood 'Queen's' English, then you would do, are you 'dyslexic' by any chance?

[Beren]

If you understood 'Queen's' English, then you would do, are you 'dyslexic' by any chance?

Could you make sense for once by any chance? Maybe if you gave me a three-word-four-syllable slogan for Britain's post-Brexit future perhaps?

[BeesKnee5]

So court has ruled that Johnson hasn't yet broken the law but they will keep the case open to ensure he doesn't.

[BeesKnee5]

First of all, delaying our exit from the E.U after 3 years plus, is not implementing leave, it's denying it, until it actually happens.

The default timeline is 2 years from notification of A50.

The power to decide our future was real, it was confirmed as such by the A50 Act of Parliament.

I don't 'shout' as you put it, the referendum instructed(read-ordered)the government, to take us out of the E.U, it's not a question of 'whining' about, which is what remainers do, it's only about implementing it.

Just as Theresa MAY had 'redlines', so too does the E.U, here is Martin Schulz expressing those redlines, "On free movement, I see a clear majority in the European Parliament for insisting that the fundamental freedoms are inseparable;
i.e. no freedom of movement for goods, capital and services, without free movement of persons.”

Additionally, Michel BARNIER has stated that we will not be allowed to stay in the SM either.

Therein lies the E.U redlines, for which Labour are intent on parking the U.K right back on the E.U's lawn, because they want to remain in the E.U & are not prepared to lose the aforementioned lines.

BoJo has not thrown anyone under the bus, in fact, the B.O.E, IMF has declared that BoJo's deal is good for the economy, the E.U would never agree any deal that infringed on the N.I peace agreement, so you are innacurate on that point, as well as others.

The 'house' cannot stop the clock, legally, we leave on 31 October, that is the default A50 date of leaving, should the E.U not grant another extension, though I suspect that they may offer one until February, but, for which BoJo can refuse to negotiate on & the E.U cannot impose one on a member state unilaterally.

The E.U can only negotiate through the government, not through the Westminster or Scottish parliaments, everything has to come through BoJo, by saying that he will not negotiate another extension, it follows that he doesn't have to explain anything to parliament on that particular issue,unless it suits him.

Parliament is seeking to overturn the adage, that 'parliament must have it's say, but government will have it's way'.

Now, having a minority in the Commons, should result in a 'no confidence' motion, that it hasn't happened, is not the governments fault,but, that operating as a mutinous rabble, by trying to run the country through a parliament, as opposed to by government, is a constitutional outrage that will come back & bite all of the opposition MP's.

I'm going to keep my response brief rather than go word for word.
Our politicians will/won't implement the decision as they see fit. Such is the will of the people.
Barnier hasn't said we can't stay in the single market, he supplied a handy chart showing which rules need to be complied with to be in the SM.
BoJo ditched the DUP, of that there is no doubt.
The house can stop the clock by instructing the prime minister to withdraw A50. Whether they will is a different matter.

A government can only have it's way of it commands a majority in parliament. This has always been the case.

I believe it was the Tories and lib Dems who introduced the FTPA. I bet they are regretting it now.

[Rich]

I stand in the tradition of Abraham Lincoln, hence I like him am a hard Reamainer. I know Brexiteers wish to stand in the tradition of the Confederacy. I repeat the only way to put an end to Brexit is to revoke and Remain.

However in the interests of honest analysis I feel I must point out that Boris's betrayal of the DUP could be a game changer. The DUP may now be willing to support a Customs Union with the EU. In that case perhaps it would make sense to sack Boris as Prime Minister and bring back Teresa May so she can continue with the negotiations that she started with Labour on a compromise Brexit in the twilight of her first period of Premiership.

[Beren]

The DUP may now be willing to support a Customs Union with the EU.

No, they're not. They seem to have lost track completely.

[Nonsense]

I'm going to keep my response brief rather than go word for word.
Our politicians will/won't implement the decision as they see fit. Such is the will of the people.
Barnier hasn't said we can't stay in the single market, he supplied a handy chart showing which rules need to be complied with to be in the SM.
BoJo ditched the DUP, of that there is no doubt.
The house can stop the clock by instructing the prime minister to withdraw A50. Whether they will is a different matter.

A government can only have it's way of it commands a majority in parliament. This has always been the case.

I believe it was the Tories and lib Dems who introduced the FTPA. I bet they are regretting it now.

If no W.A is agreed & we leave without concluding a deal on that then we would lose access to the service sector of the market for which we would trade under WTO rules.
Obviously a deal is better than no deal, being a 'win-win' situation.

Strictly speaking, yes, the government only has it's way with a working majority, that is the point of elections though,it's for that reason that a 'no-confidence' vote should always be called at the earliest opportunity, for which changes should be made imho.

You are correct about the FTPA,which is partly why we are stuck in a limbo over Brexit, otherwise an election could have been called by now & they must be regretting it now.
Then there was the 'meaningful vote' that MAY introduced, as per original Gina MILLER case, which was founded on the CRAG Act 2010 with the Ponsonbury Rule, that 2010 Act was brought in by Labour.

Withdrawing A50 would be politically toxic, as would a second referendum with a 'remain' option, which is simply a tactic to erase the 2016 result.

The DUP are treading on thin ice with their threat to work with Labour, the Tories could do two things, disassociate themselves from the DUP & 'threaten' them
with a 'unification' referendum in Ireland if they are re-elected.

[Rich]

Delete.

[Rich]

No, they're not. They seem to have lost track completely.

This doesn't mean they won't support it. It just means they don't want to give it up for free without getting something from Labour and that at this stage they don't want to burn their bridges with the hard line Conservative Brexiteers. Many Tory MPs are deeply uncomfortable with their betrayal of the DUP.

Boris has undeniably done well for himself and his party since becoming Prime Minister. He came awfully close to pushing that deal over the line. He got a lot of people, including the EU leaders, his leadership rivals, the hardest Tory Brexiteers the softest Tory Brexiteers and rebel labour MPs to back him. His pitch has essentially been, you may hate my guts but I'm a winner, just accept the compromise and on to the next stage. He's also been doing well in the polls. However if his momentum can be stopped and then his position may start to unravel. Don't forget how strong May was. Even after she lost her overall majority she remained quite popular with the public.

[Nonsense]

Could you make sense for once by any chance? Maybe if you gave me a three-word-four-syllable slogan for Britain's post-Brexit future perhaps?

I might consider that request if you can give me a correctly structured 3-word sentence.

[Beren]

I might consider that request if you can give me a correctly structured 3-word sentence.

Get Brexit done. Is that correctly structured for you? I guess it is, so could we get some Cummingsian brilliance from you?

Also, @Nonsense, I'm glad to have read a well-structured sentence from you finally that doesn't appear to be complete rubbish.

[JohnRawls]

Its time to remake this Gem for Bojo:

[BeesKnee5]

If no W.A is agreed & we leave without concluding a deal on that then we would lose access to the service sector of the market for which we would trade under WTO rules.
Obviously a deal is better than no deal, being a 'win-win' situation.

Strictly speaking, yes, the government only has it's way with a working majority, that is the point of elections though,it's for that reason that a 'no-confidence' vote should always be called at the earliest opportunity, for which changes should be made imho.

You are correct about the FTPA,which is partly why we are stuck in a limbo over Brexit, otherwise an election could have been called by now & they must be regretting it now.
Then there was the 'meaningful vote' that MAY introduced, as per original Gina MILLER case, which was founded on the CRAG Act 2010 with the Ponsonbury Rule, that 2010 Act was brought in by Labour.

Withdrawing A50 would be politically toxic, as would a second referendum with a 'remain' option, which is simply a tactic to erase the 2016 result.

The DUP are treading on thin ice with their threat to work with Labour, the Tories could do two things, disassociate themselves from the DUP & 'threaten' them
with a 'unification' referendum in Ireland if they are re-elected.

What is the best deal available?

That is the question that still appears to be unanswered. At the moment all options appear to be politically toxic unless they are the preference of the individual.

If we came to a situation where the only option left was no deal then I would not be surprised to see A50 revoked. I also would not see that as the end of brexit but a chance to reflect and come up with a coherent plan agreed by parliament rather than the current chaos of minority governments trying to force their desires through the commons.

Threatening the political arm of the UDF might not be a wise move.

[Beren]

This doesn't mean they won't support it. It just means they don't want to give it up for free without getting something from Labour and that at this stage they don't want to burn their bridges with the hard line Conservative Brexiteers. Many Tory MPs are deeply uncomfortable with their betrayal of the DUP.

I won't shed crocodile tears over the DUP. They deserved what they got as corrupt and ruthless opportunists that had been colluding with hard-line Brexiteers and the ERG all along to undermine and finally overthrow May, then they turned out to be real dupers that got duped by someone even more ruthless, corrupt and opportunist than they are.

Boris has undeniably done well for himself and his party since becoming Prime Minister.

Boris may be a general that loses many battles but wins the war finally. Even if he loses the general election but clearly wins in England, it still will be a victory for him, then he'd still survive a leadership contest I guess.

[Nonsense]

What is the best deal available?

That is the question that still appears to be unanswered. At the moment all options appear to be politically toxic unless they are the preference of the individual.

If we came to a situation where the only option left was no deal then I would not be surprised to see A50 revoked. I also would not see that as the end of brexit but a chance to reflect and come up with a coherent plan agreed by parliament rather than the current chaos of minority governments trying to force their desires through the commons.

Threatening the political arm of the UDF might not be a wise move.

Well, the 'best' available deal, is that which BoJo negotiated, of course it's not perfect, it's a compromise,but, it is fair, both for the U.K & E.U.

I think you will find that both sides made compromises,that is what made a new deal possible.

Revoking A50, would be formalising the ultimate betrayal of the referendum result, so too would a 'confirmatory' vote put to the people with a 'remain' option included.

That is a second referendum in all but name, it is the same betrayal scenario, that is why shuch ideas are toxic.

Parliament has had 3 years+, in which to come up with a 'coherent' plan, but, you might agree that parliament is incapable of such a task.

In respect to Ireland, with the DUP,I myself would prefer to see a unified community North & South inside europe, if that is what they desire.

If Scotland however wants it's independence, then they should have to pay a heavy price for it, IMHO.

[Nonsense]

Get Brexit done. Is that correctly structured for you? I guess it is, so could we get some Cummingsian brilliance from you?

Also, @Nonsense, I'm glad to have read a well-structured sentence from you finally that doesn't appear to be complete rubbish.

Erm! no,sorry, it's not a correctly structured sentence, were I to correct it for you, it would defeat the purpose of my offer,but, a nice try.

However, it's a good 'slogan' & one that CORBYN & Co, ought to take notice of.

Again, thank you for the 'complement', I hope to reciprocate at some point.

[Beren]

Erm! no,sorry, it's not a correctly structured sentence, were I to correct it for you, it would defeat the purpose of my offer,but, a nice try.

Again, thank you for the 'complement', I hope to reciprocate at some point.

You mean compliment, right?

What was the purpose of your offer anyway? If you mean to teach me some English, go on, however, I wonder if you'd do more harm than good.

[Hindsite]

You are correct in that the eligible voters of the U.K,decided by a simple majority, to Leave the European Union on 23 June 2016.

Wow, it has been over three years since the people voted to leave the European Union. That is worse than I thought. Now, I just heard that Boris Johnson submitted a letter of extension to E.U, as directed by the parliament but without his signature. Something crazy going on here.

[Beren]

Something crazy going on here.

Even crazier than Trump.