The Politics Thread

[taddyontoast]

Labour could do worse than tempt Ed back and have a Stalinist purge of Momentum (oh the irony) & nail their flag to a remain/leave with a deal ticket

yeah - but nobody can be PM unless they are bacon-sandwich confident (apparently!)

as for "stalinist purges" (though I suspect that language is a bit hyperbolic in this case!) - I think that's Boris you're talking about!

Think you'd be better asking Winker Watson about purges.

Has he been purged?

You're pitting a bloke who has not been purged against 21 MPs who have been purged?

[Hoboh]

Labour could do worse than tempt Ed back and have a Stalinist purge of Momentum (oh the irony) & nail their flag to a remain/leave with a deal ticket

yeah - but nobody can be PM unless they are bacon-sandwich confident (apparently!)

as for "stalinist purges" (though I suspect that language is a bit hyperbolic in this case!) - I think that's Boris you're talking about!

Think you'd be better asking Winker Watson about purges.

Has he been purged?

You're pitting a bloke who has not been purged against 21 MPs who have been purged?

He survived, just, now that was a proper purge attempt not whip withdrawing. And it's far from over in the labour party, that was the start.

[Enoch]

Who's black cat is blacker than who's black cat!

Though in truth it's more apples and orangutans.

[Prufrock]

Loooool. Supreme Court banter era. Govt lose 11-0.

[Bruce Rioja]

Loooool. Supreme Court banter era. Govt lose 11-0.

So, what happens now? Are they all back in this avvo?

Have to say, I fully expected them to bottle it, but 11-0? Wow. I don't think I've ever been quite so wrong.

[BWFC_Insane]

Loooool. Supreme Court banter era. Govt lose 11-0.

So, what happens now? Are they all back in this avvo?

Have to say, I fully expected them to bottle it, but 11-0? Wow. I don't think I've ever been quite so wrong.

All back in as soon as according to the speaker.

[Enoch]

"Legal profession vote for litigation"

It's hardly come as a shock.

[DJBlu]

Really have had enough of all this Brexit bollocks.

We're going to have 3-4 more weeks of nothing as no one will make a decision, even if they do it'll be back in front of the court.

This decision has so many ramifications for future politics. How many more decisions from the government are going to be put in front of the supreme court by those that can afford it?

[Hoboh]

So there we have it, the judiciary has declared war on the the people by supporting some parliamentarians who are refusing to let the people have a democratic, free, election. The legal system has clearly overstepped it's mark and moved into the realms of not just being responsible for upholding law made and passed by parliament but into the field of dictating how said parliament works. they have done no favours to the legal profession in which fewer and fewer people believe delivers justice, it's a slippery slope from here on in.
I wish I had the money to go and challenge the opposition for defying the prerogative of agreeing to an election, not delaying for spurious reasons, a real coup, the voice of the people to be heard. An election that would put to bed once and for all the personal views of so called elected representatives.

[Prufrock]

first of many part time constitutional lawyers on the internet today.

Ps. There is no prerogative power to call an election anymore.

[Prufrock]

Loooool. Supreme Court banter era. Govt lose 11-0.

So, what happens now? Are they all back in this avvo?

Have to say, I fully expected them to bottle it, but 11-0? Wow. I don't think I've ever been quite so wrong.

All back in as soon as according to the speaker.

Tory conference next week isn't it? Probs a reccess for that, if they rustle up a majority

[Bruce Rioja]

Will Boris be off to the European Court of Justice then?

[Hoboh]

first of many part time constitutional lawyers on the internet today.

Ps. There is no prerogative power to call an election anymore.

Ok smarty pants, I don't pretend to be a stupid tw*t who plays simple games making up gibberish script dressed up as learned, nor do I waste days deciding a full fcuking stop is in the wrong place, I actually have a life. So precedent is the word, ok corrected, now lets move on to the real point, the judiciary are there to uphold the law as made by Parliament, not tell parliament how it is run, power well over abused. Remainers, hell parliamentarians to boot have had over hundreds of years the power to dictate prorogation, but have chosen not to do so, why because a small group of wealthy vote losers want to change things, do the court feel they have a power, not given to them, to intervene?

[jimbo]

Will Boris be off to the European Court of Justice then?

What happened to the much lauded sovereignty of our courts and parliament?!

The fall out from this will be fascinating.

[BWFC_Insane]

Loooool. Supreme Court banter era. Govt lose 11-0.

So, what happens now? Are they all back in this avvo?

Have to say, I fully expected them to bottle it, but 11-0? Wow. I don't think I've ever been quite so wrong.

All back in as soon as according to the speaker.

Tory conference next week isn't it? Probs a reccess for that, if they rustle up a majority

A recess from sitting but parliament is still in operation during a recess.

[Prufrock]

first of many part time constitutional lawyers on the internet today.

Ps. There is no prerogative power to call an election anymore.

Ok smarty pants, I don't pretend to be a stupid tw*t who plays simple games making up gibberish script dressed up as learned, nor do I waste days deciding a full fcuking stop is in the wrong place, I actually have a life. So precedent is the word, ok corrected, now lets move on to the real point, the judiciary are there to uphold the law as made by Parliament, not tell parliament how it is run, power well over abused. Remainers, hell parliamentarians to boot have had over hundreds of years the power to dictate prorogation, but have chosen not to do so, why because a small group of wealthy vote losers want to change things, do the court feel they have a power, not given to them, to intervene?

No one expects you to be an expert on constitutional law. Just don't pretend to be. The rest of what you have written is gibberish (not I don't agree with it, I don't know what it means.). Thankfully we do have experts on constitutional law and 11 of them have unanimously agreed.

[Hoboh]

Will Boris be off to the European Court of Justice then?

What happened to the much lauded sovereignty of our courts and parliament?!

The fall out from this will be fascinating.

I think all the above died off the day a group of hardliners posing as democratic people representatives decided that peoples votes only count when the go in their favour, funny how they duck a GE because they believe the vote will also not be in their favour.

These people are worse than anything Stalin ever did to democracy.

[Prufrock]

Para 1 of the judgement (which I'm sure you've read): "it is important to emphasise that the issue on these appeals is not when and in what terms the UK is to leave the European Union".

And, I'm far from a fan of Corbyn but the idea he is blocking an election is clearly disingenuous. It's all he wants. It's not unreasonable to refuse to agree until there's an extension to prevent no deal. It's the govt wanting to change the status quo. They don't have a majority, do would protect the status quo until they can get one. If they win the election (democracy, yay) they can push through their agenda.

[Hoboh]

first of many part time constitutional lawyers on the internet today.

Ps. There is no prerogative power to call an election anymore.

Ok smarty pants, I don't pretend to be a stupid tw*t who plays simple games making up gibberish script dressed up as learned, nor do I waste days deciding a full fcuking stop is in the wrong place, I actually have a life. So precedent is the word, ok corrected, now lets move on to the real point, the judiciary are there to uphold the law as made by Parliament, not tell parliament how it is run, power well over abused. Remainers, hell parliamentarians to boot have had over hundreds of years the power to dictate prorogation, but have chosen not to do so, why because a small group of wealthy vote losers want to change things, do the court feel they have a power, not given to them, to intervene?

No one expects you to be an expert on constitutional law. Just don't pretend to be. The rest of what you have written is gibberish (not I don't agree with it, I don't know what it means.). Thankfully we do have experts on constitutional law and 11 of them have unanimously agreed.

For someone in the legal business you really are a simpleton, nor am I pretending anything. that simple enough?

Please tell me when it is normal for the opposition, at any point to run from a general election, simple enough?

Legal system is there to enforce and uphold laws passed by parliament. simple enough?

Parliament has for centuries decided upon the way it runs and legislates, simple enough?

So why does a court feel it has the power and right to intervene in something parliament clearly had the power at any time to change but chose not to, simple enough?

If you don't find that simple enough, find another job!

[Hoboh]

Para 1 of the judgement (which I'm sure you've read): "it is important to emphasise that the issue on these appeals is not when and in what terms the UK is to leave the European Union".

And, I'm far from a fan of Corbyn but the idea he is blocking an election is clearly disingenuous. It's all he wants. It's not unreasonable to refuse to agree until there's an extension to prevent no deal. It's the govt wanting to change the status quo. They don't have a majority, do would protect the status quo until they can get one. If they win the election (democracy, yay) they can push through their agenda.

So when did a leader of the opposition ever refuse the offer of an election, an election he is still calling for, same with Swineherd?