Originally posted by Cassius_Smoke
View Post
"Send him back!"
-
He is currently in New York, where he was born, and he has to stay there whilst criminal proceedings are held against him.
"Send him back!" -
Career consequences? None
Legal consequences? None
Because the law disappears up it's own backside the second the top brass are involved
Listening to hard Brexiters on R2 is painful - a lot of 'the Supreme Court are mugs! It's disgusting that they are overturning our democracy!'
Could they understand the situation any less at this point?Comment
-
-
Johnson took an extra long time to respond to the Supreme Court ruling, his response? It'll be harder to get that impossible Unicorn Deal now
i.e Political waffle that actually means he's speechless. He's been caught pants down with Cameron's pig mid-act and the only person truly rejoicing at this point will be Theresa MayComment
-
I'm surprised that the courts wanted to get involved in a political decision - this will have unforseen consequences in the future when decisions made by governments have the potential to become overturned by the high courts.Originally posted by Superman Falls View Post
It's also going to galvantize the hard right. This is perhaps not a bad thing, as I think we'll now see a surge back to the Brexit party, it just depends on how big that surge is. If it goes back to levels when May was at her least popular, that will not be a good thing, it needs to split the Brexit vote between the Tories and Brexit party, not completely swing it.Comment
-
It's hilarious. He can do no wrong for these muppets. I was expecting a few at least to get upset that he and that worm Rees-Mogg had lied to Her Britannic Majesty.Originally posted by Superman Falls View PostComment
-
That miserable benefits sponge of a woman totally knew everything, it's the one count I could believe he was innocent ofComment
-
I think it's shown gaping holes in our parliamentary system. The house or Lords and the Queen need to have more say. Ultimately its her country and she should have told him to ram it.Comment
-
There was a whole furore about that in a way on the radio the other day where the presenter was a royalist and yet livid that the Queen had agreed to help Cameron in the Scottish Referendum. The fact is she constantly meddles with political practices by the government and as one of the key benefactors of the privileged system she's blatantly going to be a hardline Tory so useless with things like this. If she got more in charge we'd probably be without a royal family before long though.
The Royal Family is utterly immoral as a concept, the less of them the better. It's only Parliaments powers robbing her of hers these days that stops them being torn down for what they'd actually be - a dictatorship.Comment
-
This is another one of those areas where I have to admit to a level of ignorance. I don't know how the role of the Queen works. I was under the impression that, being a figurehead, she wasn't really allowed to say no to a prime minister or government. Am I wrong? Can she essentially pull rank?Comment
-
She has no actual power in practice, but she does wield tremendous influence among the aristocratic and political circles.Originally posted by Dogg Thang View PostComment
-
But officially, if things go too far could she step in? Or could she have even said no to Johnson?Comment
-
That was part of the 'surprise' of her getting involved in the Scottish Referendum. The PM meets with her every week but for some reason fans have long been under the bizarre notion that she just sits there like a novelty bobblehead - the shock that she actually has an opinion or gets involved
Comment
-
Didn't the last monarch that tried get hung or something?Comment
-
Charles 2nd. He was convicted of treasonComment
Comment