The British Politics Thread
-
So if this is decided to be unlawful the Queen is legally a fucking dope.
It would really put into question the role of the Monarch if they can be this easily rolled over by a rogue PM. -
Yeah but he’s a pro rogue.iosGameCentre:T3hDaddy;
XBL: MistaTeaTime -
are we not at the stage where the queen can dredge up some ancient directive, disband parliament altogether and assume absolute rule?
not that that would necessarily be any better than what we have, but if we're gonna be fucked over by the unelected elite ignoring parliament, it may as well be by the most elite elite!"Like i said, context is missing."
http://ssgg.uk -
LivDiv wrote:So if this is decided to be unlawful the Queen is legally a fucking dope.
It would really put into question the role of the Monarch if they can be this easily rolled over by a rogue PM.
It should already have been in question anyway. -
The Daddy wrote:Yeah but he’s a pro rogue.
Oh, well played. -
Brutal official response from Tories on Breixt Party’s election deal offer. A senior Conservative source: “Neither Nigel Farage nor Arron Banks are fit and proper persons and they should never be allowed anywhere near government”. Boris clearly wants to kill this dead.
Asked why senior Conservative source thinks Farage and Banks are not fit and proper persons for Govt: “All our experience of dealing with them leads us to believe that”. Very tough to go back on that.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1171757066068910080 -
Odd that Dominic Cummings isn't in that list... -
There’s a decent chance that Cummings is the source of the quote. There’s no love lost between Cummings and Farage/Banks.
-
See, I told you Boris wasn't bluffing.
Plan A was always no deal ....Steam: Ruffnekk
Windows Live: mr of unlocking
Fightcade2: mrofunlocking -
Farage is calling for no deal as part of this pact. How is Johnson refusing this offer evidence of him wanting no deal?
-
Cummings hates the nationalists as he considers them idiots. They (the Tories and Cummings) will try to work around them for as long as they can. But no deal is still plan A. If the EU gives in: Bonus! They're not counting on it though.
Steam: Ruffnekk
Windows Live: mr of unlocking
Fightcade2: mrofunlocking -
Okay.
My take is that this pact would be advantageous to the Tories but they aren’t taking it because plan A is to get a deal and they don’t want to be locked into an agreement which prevents that. -
If they agree to no deal, they lose deniability.
Also, they don't want to dance to Farage's tune.
Also, they may say something completely different tomorrow. -
No deal because they will soon have the US as a trading partner. No deal because it creates perfect laissez faire market conditions. Randian libertarians love that shit. No deal because they want to minimise the influence of Brussels. No deal because they want to emulate Singapore's success. Everyone loves Singapore, that Chinese success story, if only the proc would embrace libertarian values.Steam: Ruffnekk
Windows Live: mr of unlocking
Fightcade2: mrofunlocking -
TBH, at this point I think any plan that Johnson may have had is in tatters and he’s currently searching for a way out, I just find it a weird argument that the refusal of a pact with a party that wants no deal and which is likely to gobble up up a large chunk of your vote is somehow evidence of wanting no deal.
-
No but you can’t take what he says as evidence for what he wants either.
-
No, I don’t think you can. I almost put that in my original alternative take, but couldn’t be arsed.
-
Yossarian wrote:There’s a decent chance that Cummings is the source of the quote. There’s no love lost between Cummings and Farage/Banks.
Cummings' hates them both. It's reciprocal, comes from the designated referendum lead campaign days
Don't wank. Zinc in your sperms -
If the Tories are actually running on a no deal platform, doesn't that make the Brexit Party pointless? There's no reason to vote for them if a bigger party is offering the only thing they have.Yossarian wrote:TBH, at this point I think any plan that Johnson may have had is in tatters and he’s currently searching for a way out, I just find it a weird argument that the refusal of a pact with a party that wants no deal and which is likely to gobble up up a large chunk of your vote is somehow evidence of wanting no deal. -
They aren’t currently running on a no deal platform.
-
They aren't currently running on any platform. I mean in an election post-deadline, after they've failed to get a deal.
-
Johnson has said repeatedly that he’d rather leave with a deal, he may be bullshitting, but he hasn’t been prevaricating around it, and he’s been saying that since before he even became PM.
They may pivot once the deadline has passed, who knows. -
I think the thinking is no deal loses the Tories seats in the South so they need Farage to offset them in the North. Where the Labour Leave tribalists won’t ever vote Tory but will apparently vote for a weird racist toad man that is basically a Tory.JonB wrote:
If the Tories are actually running on a no deal platform, doesn't that make the Brexit Party pointless? There's no reason to vote for them if a bigger party is offering the only thing they have.Yossarian wrote:TBH, at this point I think any plan that Johnson may have had is in tatters and he’s currently searching for a way out, I just find it a weird argument that the refusal of a pact with a party that wants no deal and which is likely to gobble up up a large chunk of your vote is somehow evidence of wanting no deal.
-
A quick aside regarding WhatsApp and our Article 8 Human Right (right to respect for private life, including personal correspondence). Some Police Scotland cops were recently disciplined in relation to messages they had exchanged in a private WhatsApp group. The cops objected that their Article 8 rights had been infringed, and a judge ruled that Police officers should be held to a higher standard, and that effectively they have less protection of their Article 8 rights than others. Now, I find it galling to be told that Police officers deserve less protection of their human rights, and imagine it will be challenged, but if cops can have their tasteless out of work jokes open to disclosure, you can bet your bottom dollar I expect the PM’s Brexit chats to be made available.
As much as I hate to sound like a ‘sovereign citizen’ or ‘freeman of the land’, there’s a difference between unlawful and illegal. Something is illegal if it breaks an existing law. Something being unlawful means that there is no law to support it. A police officer asking you to turn out your pockets, without reason, is not illegal, but nor is it a lawful order. Given that the Queen, to the best of my knowledge, wasn’t in a position to refuse the request to prorogue, then lying about the reasons isn’t really fraud, as far as I can tell, because he hasn’t really gained something he wouldn’t have got anyway.LivDiv wrote:What grounds are they claiming it is unlawful?
...
I may just be missing something but I can't see how it is illegal. -
Cheers for that Andy.
I still feel like our side are clutching at straws with this but if there are straws to clutch we must. -
Here's a stat if not seen before...
85% of the UK based hedge fund companies that went short on the result of the EU referendum (between April and June 2016) were directly or indirectly connected to hedge funds who were part of the Vote Leave campaign
How these fuckers got/get away with it, even now... -
Andy wrote:A quick aside regarding WhatsApp and our Article 8 Human Right (right to respect for private life, including personal correspondence). Some Police Scotland cops were recently disciplined in relation to messages they had exchanged in a private WhatsApp group. The cops objected that their Article 8 rights had been infringed, and a judge ruled that Police officers should be held to a higher standard, and that effectively they have less protection of their Article 8 rights than others. Now, I find it galling to be told that Police officers deserve less protection of their human rights, and imagine it will be challenged, but if cops can have their tasteless out of work jokes open to disclosure, you can bet your bottom dollar I expect the PM’s Brexit chats to be made available.
I suppose the difference here is that in the police chat incident someone in the group volunteered the information, rather than someone being compelled to provide it. Once it has been released it is in the public domain and is no longer considered private. There is an argument that, if the person who shared the chat was a government employee then art. 8 rights might have been infringed, but I would suspect it's more of an HR issue than a human rights one.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions2,718
- Games1,881
- Off topic837