Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36011801)

Well, it takes two sides to tango. The anger seems to be on the remainer side due to the proroguing of Parliament. If they calm down, I am sure it will be reciprocated.

The anger on the streets will not go away until this matter is resolved, and if the electorate do not get what they voted for, that is to leave, everything will be escalated. Remainers cannot just shout insults and ignore what the majority want. They need to vote and help us achieve a deal which enables us to forge our own trade deals with the rest of the world.

If they don't do this, we will have the scenario they say they don't want ie, a 'no deal'.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011806)

For proroguing Parliament read "breaking the law".

If there's one thing I'm certain of its that Boris won't calm down. His electoral future depends on stoking the fire of nationalism.

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36011807)

The law didn't exist at the time of proroguing, it was invented on Tuesday.

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36011775)

But who, in your words, can "shove Corbyn out the way"? His opposition within his party are weak with no guts and JC's inner circle just keep telling him he is wonderful.

The Lib Dems have also made a big mistake in putting the Revoke stake in the ground "when we are in Government", really? Get real. They should be cementing a centre ground coalition to prevent Farage and his cohorts from teaming up with Johnson and taking us off into a necon paradise.

It is as if *all* politicians, from all sides, have lost all sense of perspective.

---------- Post added at 22:53 ---------- Previous post was at 22:50 ----------



Yeah, his dismissal of MPs' death threats as humbug ... really on the ball. The man is a cretin ..

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011809)

Of course it did. Government was playing fast and loose with its interpretation of convention. Which is/was obvious to everyone but the most "Brexit at all costs" types.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36011811)

Interpretation of convention is not evidence of the existance of legal statute.

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36011807)

The law didn't exist at the time of proroguing, it was invented on Tuesday.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011813)

They didn't invent law as claimed. Only Parliament can do that.

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36011817)

It's clear they invented law to frustrate brexit,11 out of 11 judges reach the same conclusion , that just stinks of an establishment stitch up.

It seems that any one on the remain side can invent laws to keep us shackled to the corrupt EU.

There's even talk of rehashing the surrender bill now.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011815)

No law was invented on Tuesday - the Supreme Court adjudicated that BJ's actions were unlawful (that his reasons for prorogation for five weeks were not supported by the weight of evidence), and therefore were null and void.

Again, to avoid confusion - no new law was invented on Tuesday; people saying this have a lack of understanding of what actually happened.

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36011817)

It's clear they invented law to frustrate brexit,11 out of 11 judges reach the same conclusion , that just stinks of an establishment stitch up.

It seems that any one on the remain side can invent laws to keep us shackled to the corrupt EU.

There's even talk of rehashing the surrender bill now.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011815)

No law was invented on Tuesday - the Supreme Court adjudicated that BJ's actions were unlawful (that his reasons for prorogation for five weeks were not supported by the weight of evidence), and therefore were null and void.

Again, to avoid confusion - no new law was invented on Tuesday; people saying this have a lack of understanding of what actually happened.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011824)

I can explain it to you, I can’t understand it for you...

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36011827)

The back room lawyers opinion is noted, even if it was not asked for nor needed.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011830)

Not my "opinion", it’s a fact (even if you do mix them up sometimes).

If a new law was "invented" on Tuesday, could you please show the legislation that "invented’ this law, as laws can only be created or changed by an Act of Parliament or Secondary legislation through statutory instruments (which can only be raised by the Government).

The Judiciary can’t "invent" laws.

You may find this helpful - https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/