More Tory lies

[jack D and coke]

11 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

I'm not smearing him. I think his tweet is hyperbolic though.

 

Let's see his amendments. That'll be a genuinely good thing to see and one which has more substance than him tweeting.

 

You're forgetting also that ultimately in his view it's all a choice of identity and nationalism. Personally I've 0 interest in any nationalism be it Scottish, English or British. James Dornan or Rees-Mogg, to me both are narrow minded nationalists with narrow world views. So using nationalistic language to me doesn't convince me of his intent, actions do. Let's see his amendments.

Genuinely haven’t seen you have the same disdain for British government decisions towards Scotland, Wales and NI whereas you’re easy enough about digging out the SNP for not towing the line. 

I’m shocked. Not. 

[JamboX2]

5 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Genuinely haven’t seen you have the same disdain for British government decisions towards Scotland, Wales and NI whereas you’re easy enough about digging out the SNP for not towing the line. 

I’m shocked. Not. 

 

I have said before I think (1) Brexit is a shambles (UK govt fault), (2) you'll have seen my earlier posts calling them morally bankrupt and (3) I said it's badly drafted law.

 

3 things you'll ignore.

 

I seem to be taking a lot of personalised flak about myself rather atm. Best I duck out for a while. 

 

Sometimes a contrary opinion or trying to add light to things can help inform rather than feed already held views. End of the day this'll be resolved. A collegiate atmosphere would help. My issue is the ott language not the intent.

 

Cheerie bye!

[deesidejambo]

On 24/04/2018 at 16:15, Sraman said:

 

Can hardly blame him, what with the various media onslaughts, there's a lot of it about.

 

It's good to note that he has seen the error of his ways and is thinking more critically about the future. We can only hope there are more like him out there that are doing the same and, hopefully, carrying on this discussion in real life with friends and family.

 

Deeside the pioneer!

Thanks for the compliment.    Although I’m not sure I’ve seen the error of my ways just yet.

 

I’m all for PR so LibDems need to get it more on the agenda

 

However at the next GE if Indy is still on the table I’ll vote for whatever party has the best chance to defeat it.    At the moment the evil Tories grabbed the initiative but I expect Labour to try and grab it back.

 

 

[Victorian]

Home Office confirmed as having targets for voluntary 'deportation'.     Tatty bye to the liar Rudd.

 

[deesidejambo]

On 24/04/2018 at 11:48, Boris said:

 

Pretty sure they do.

 

And of course, it depends what sort of PR you use.  For example, the electoral system at Holyrood has produced a pro-independence majority at the last two Scottish general elections.

 

I agree wholeheartedly that PR is required for Westminster.  

 

You are entitled to vote for who you wish, but it was a general election, not an independence referendum and even although you were so hyped by that single issue, you have lent your support to the most odious bunch of crooks in recent memory, whether you like that or not.

It was a GE but thanks to Salmond, who said it was all about Independence, and Davidson, who jumped on that it turned into an Indy by proxy vote, otherwise you won’t be able to explain why the Tories did so well.

 

Interestingly the only voice up here who I heard outwardly dsupporting PR for Westminster was Davidson a few years ago, but I expect she had been told to shut it by her masters down south.    The other supporters of PR would be UKIP though.

[robbo1874]

6 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Home Office confirmed as having targets for voluntary 'deportation'.     Tatty bye to the liar Rudd.

 

I doubt it unfortunately. For the simple reason I think May will resist as much as possible because it'll obviously then fall back on her. I hope I'm wrong because to me it's disgusting what has happened to some of these people. Reading some of the horror stories is brutal.

This government is rotten to the core, propped up by buying DUP votes. There seems to be no departmental responsibility  any more.

 

 

[Boris]

44 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

It was a GE but thanks to Salmond, who said it was all about Independence, and Davidson, who jumped on that it turned into an Indy by proxy vote, otherwise you won’t be able to explain why the Tories did so well.

 

Interestingly the only voice up here who I heard outwardly dsupporting PR for Westminster was Davidson a few years ago, but I expect she had been told to shut it by her masters down south.    The other supporters of PR would be UKIP though.

 

So the Tories were able to seduce gullible people like yourself to vote for them.

 

Deary me!

[deesidejambo]

35 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

So the Tories were able to seduce gullible people like yourself to vote for them.

 

Deary me!

Not true Boris.      I thought you were less glib than that.  Indy was identified as an issue at the GE by Alex Salmond, not the Tories - for you to deny that seems naive.

 

If Salmond had shut his piehole then Davidson would not have had the way in to pummel them.   And to say everyone who took the opportunity to vote based on this important issue are "gullible" is a bit smarmy imo.   

 

But as you support PR I presume you will join me in voting for it next time round (assuming LibDems get the finger out on it).

[Boris]

3 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Not true Boris.      I thought you were less glib than that.  Indy was identified as an issue at the GE by Alex Salmond, not the Tories - for you to deny that seems naive.

 

If Salmond had shut his piehole then Davidson would not have had the way in to pummel them.   And to say everyone who took the opportunity to vote based on this important issue are "gullible" is a bit smarmy imo.   

 

But as you support PR I presume you will join me in voting for it next time round (assuming LibDems get the finger out on it).

 

SNP support PR too IIRC, as do the Greens along with the LD's.  So many parties that could get voted for if PR is the single issue you wish to vote for at a general election.

 

I don't think the word gullible is smary at all.  What other word would you use when you are sold snake oil?

[Justin Z]

10 hours ago, Victorian said:

 

I've always been for the possible development and enhancement of V.A.T. with a scale of rates on different goods and services,  etc.       It would add bureaucracy and could be open to abuse regarding how goods and services are categorised and declared,  etc.      But it's certainly a progressive tax.     The government probably also views PAYE collected income tax and NIC as a much more controlled and controllable method of balancing and guaranteeing the tax yield.

 

I admit I don't know a lot about VAT but have always compared it to sales tax in the US, which is absolutely, unequivocally regressive. How does VAT differ so that it becomes progressive?

[shaun.lawson]

7 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

I admit I don't know a lot about VAT but have always compared it to sales tax in the US, which is absolutely, unequivocally regressive. How does VAT differ so that it becomes progressive?

 

Exactly. The proposal suggested above - no VAT on essentials, but rather on luxuries - would be progressive. But VAT/sales tax is comfortably the most regressive tax in existence as it stands - and worse, an invisible one which is rarely discussed by politicians.

 

We have it here too: albeit, to encourage the formalisation of the economy, there are big discounts for using debit cards, and smaller ones for using credit cards. But even then, given how many poor people live in areas where shops don't have card machines, it doesn't really do what it says on the tin.

[deesidejambo]

35 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

SNP support PR too IIRC, as do the Greens along with the LD's.  So many parties that could get voted for if PR is the single issue you wish to vote for at a general election.

 

I don't think the word gullible is smary at all.  What other word would you use when you are sold snake oil?

Its your view that everyone who chose to vote Tory in Scotland to ward off Indy2 is gullible.    I dont think many were genuine Tory supporters but I expect they are Nationalists so voted accordingly.    

 

But just slagging off as stupid or gullible or odious or evil those who dont agree with your credo doesn't help your position in fact I'd say it demeans it a bit.

 

I use Eddie Izzard as an example - for Brexit he was on QT and he just ranted on and on and on about how stupid anyone who votes for Brexit is.   I believe this behaviour didn't help his case at all, in fact even Farage made Izzard look like a ranting loony, and thats saying something coming from Farage.

 

But all is not lost.  I've just returned from MIL visit in rural Derbyshire.    This area is 100% Tory, was 100% UKIP before Brexit.  Blue-rinsed pensioners everywhere, all white, all old.     Perfect Tory heartland.    Even they are getting fed up with May.    Now they are never going to vote Labour,. but if there is a malaise there then I expect similar in the rest of England.     For me the next GE is Corbyns to lose.

 

 

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

1 minute ago, deesidejambo said:

I use Eddie Izzard as an example - for Brexit he was on QT and he just ranted on and on and on about how stupid anyone who votes for Brexit is.   I believe this behaviour didn't help his case at all, in fact even Farage made Izzard look like a ranting loony, and thats saying something coming from Farage.

 

Totally agree. Izzard's entire ramble was basically "vote EU for peace and love!" He was so awful, he could practically have been working for the Leave campaign.

 

I was, naturally, less than impressed by the surge in Tory support in Scotland on the very day Corbyn made such inroads in England. But there were reasons for it - reasons which had very little to do with the detail of Tory policy, and still something to do with the Labour branch office too.

[deesidejambo]

4 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Totally agree. Izzard's entire ramble was basically "vote EU for peace and love!" He was so awful, he could practically have been working for the Leave campaign.

 

I was, naturally, less than impressed by the surge in Tory support in Scotland on the very day Corbyn made such inroads in England. But there were reasons for it - reasons which had very little to do with the detail of Tory policy, and still something to do with the Labour branch office too.

Next time round will be different - I suspect Labours weakness on what was an "open door" in Scotland was telling - imo it was driven by Corbyn himself though - Dugdale, IIRC was talking about the Union early in the campaign but stopped and didn't really raise it again - I wonder if she was told to shut it.

 

Anyway next time I think its time for the SNP to go all out for Independence - they currently want three things that imo are conflicted -

 

a) Independence

Represent themselves at Holyrood

c) Represent Scotland at Westminster, including Brexit negotiations.

 

The irony is that, for example, if Brexit (c0 fails miserably, that may help the Indy position (a).  So its in the SNPs interests (a)for Brexit to fail.   A successful Brexit (c) would weaken the Indy cause (a).  So I see the SNP getting caught up in "wanting everything".

 

i agree with Aussie - the SNP should go all out for Independence and Independence only as a mandate.  They should., like Sinn Fein, say they will not take their seats in Parliament etc etc, thus forcing the issue to the fore.    Then the whole thing can be put to bed one way or another and we can move on. 

[Justin Z]

10 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Next time round will be different - I suspect Labours weakness on what was an "open door" in Scotland was telling - imo it was driven by Corbyn himself though - Dugdale, IIRC was talking about the Union early in the campaign but stopped and didn't really raise it again - I wonder if she was told to shut it.

 

Anyway next time I think its time for the SNP to go all out for Independence - they currently want three things that imo are conflicted -

 

a) Independence

b) Represent themselves at Holyrood

c) Represent Scotland at Westminster, including Brexit negotiations.

 

The irony is that, for example, if Brexit (c0 fails miserably, that may help the Indy position (a).  So its in the SNPs interests (a)for Brexit to fail.   A successful Brexit (c) would weaken the Indy cause (a).  So I see the SNP getting caught up in "wanting everything".

 

i agree with Aussie - the SNP should go all out for Independence and Independence only as a mandate.  They should., like Sinn Fein, say they will not take their seats in Parliament etc etc, thus forcing the issue to the fore.    Then the whole thing can be put to bed one way or another and we can move on. 

 

I agree that these positions are conflicted in a vacuum, but I'd rather a party try to represent its constituents' interest in whatever way it can even if that means playing by rules it doesn't like as they currently stand. Likewise, giving an honest go at making the best of Brexit wherever possible, even if a catastrophe would be politically advantageous, is the ethical thing to do.

 

You're right that the other path to this would be doing what Sinn Fein do. I'm not sure if switching approaches mid-stream is really feasible though.

 

Edit: It's also a little different when you have a majority in a devolved parliament, when the power vested in that parliament comes only from a different parliament where you have seats.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2018 by Justin Z

[deesidejambo]

2 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

I agree that these positions are conflicted in a vacuum, but I'd rather a party try to represent its constituents' interest in whatever way it can even if that means playing by rules it doesn't like as they currently stand. Likewise, giving an honest go at making the best of Brexit wherever possible, even if a catastrophe would be politically advantageous, is the ethical thing to do.

 

You're right that the other path to this would be doing what Sinn Fein do. I'm not sure if switching approaches mid-stream is really feasible though.

Indeed it is a thorny issue, but imo the Indy impasse is going to last for years and all that will do is further divide the Country and divert attention away from other stuff.   I'd rather have it "over and done with" one way or the other.    

 

Sturgeon herself said the next IndyRef will be when the polls showed 60% in favour - thats clear enough, but then the day after the Brexit vote she orgasmically cried "game on" whilst not recognising that the 62% of Scots who voted Remain (I was one of them) are not the same 62% who would vote for Indy (I'm not one of them!).

 

Now where are we?  She wants indy2 but the polls are nowhere near 60%.   Does she plough on? 

 

 

 

 

[Boris]

1 hour ago, deesidejambo said:

Its your view that everyone who chose to vote Tory in Scotland to ward off Indy2 is gullible.  

 

If that was their sole reason, and then subsequently bleat about this Government then yes!  What else were they expecting?

 

1 hour ago, deesidejambo said:

 

 

 I dont think many were genuine Tory supporters but I expect they are Nationalists so voted accordingly.    

 

Sorry, I don't really understand that point.  By nationalist do you mean unionist?

 

1 hour ago, deesidejambo said:

 

But just slagging off as stupid or gullible or odious or evil those who dont agree with your credo doesn't help your position in fact I'd say it demeans it a bit.

 

Not sure I've said stupid, I'll stand by gullible as the point I was making was that if you voted Tory as a bulwark against an independence referendum, and didn't expect them, the Tories, to be this odious Government that it is (you see, my use of the word odious was in relation to this government, not the individual Tory voter!) then yes, that is being gullible.

 

1 hour ago, deesidejambo said:

 

I use Eddie Izzard as an example - for Brexit he was on QT and he just ranted on and on and on about how stupid anyone who votes for Brexit is.   I believe this behaviour didn't help his case at all, in fact even Farage made Izzard look like a ranting loony, and thats saying something coming from Farage.

 

Didn't see it, but doesn't surprise me.

 

1 hour ago, deesidejambo said:

 

But all is not lost.  I've just returned from MIL visit in rural Derbyshire.    This area is 100% Tory, was 100% UKIP before Brexit.  Blue-rinsed pensioners everywhere, all white, all old.     Perfect Tory heartland.    Even they are getting fed up with May.    Now they are never going to vote Labour,. but if there is a malaise there then I expect similar in the rest of England.     For me the next GE is Corbyns to lose.

 

 

 

We shall see.  Depends if May survives that long!

[Thunderstruck]

2 hours ago, deesidejambo said:

Indeed it is a thorny issue, but imo the Indy impasse is going to last for years and all that will do is further divide the Country and divert attention away from other stuff.   I'd rather have it "over and done with" one way or the other.    

 

Sturgeon herself said the next IndyRef will be when the polls showed 60% in favour - thats clear enough, but then the day after the Brexit vote she orgasmically cried "game on" whilst not recognising that the 62% of Scots who voted Remain (I was one of them) are not the same 62% who would vote for Indy (I'm not one of them!).

 

Now where are we?  She wants indy2 but the polls are nowhere near 60%.   Does she plough on? 

 

 

 

 

 

Don’t forget her “Triple Lock” statement in May 17. 

 

From the Herald: 

Launching her party’s manifesto in Perth, the First Minister said she had already secured a mandate based on Brexit, and this had been reinforced by a recent vote in Holyrood.

 

But if SNP MPs were elected in most of Scotland’s 59 seats, it would make it “democratically unsustainable" for Theresa May to deny Scots a vote on their future after the Brexit process.

 

Note the “secured a mandate based on Brexit”. Palpable nonsense; it was not a vote on Scottish independence and conflating the two just goes to show the almost desperate hitching of the Indy wagon to any event, no matter how remote. 

 

There seems to be a lot of selective memory on this site. If this “triple lock” was not an attempt to turn an election into a single issue (independence) vote then I don’t know what would be. So, of course, those opposed to independence would be obliged to vote in such a way that her aim was not achieved; the Tories offered the best alternative. 

 

Then again, a Tory Government probably suits her Grievance agenda so there may be some perverse method in her madness. 

 

[Boris]

3 hours ago, deesidejambo said:

Indeed it is a thorny issue, but imo the Indy impasse is going to last for years and all that will do is further divide the Country and divert attention away from other stuff.   I'd rather have it "over and done with" one way or the other.    

 

 

Yet you voted for a party in the General Election to specifically deny this!

 

10 minutes ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

Don’t forget her “Triple Lock” statement in May 17. 

 

From the Herald: 

 

 

 

Note the “secured a mandate based on Brexit”. Palpable nonsense; it was not a vote on Scottish independence and conflating the two just goes to show the almost desperate hitching of the Indy wagon to any event, no matter how remote. 

 

There seems to be a lot of selective memory on this site. If this “triple lock” was not an attempt to turn an election into a single issue (independence) vote then I don’t know what would be. So, of course, those opposed to independence would be obliged to vote in such a way that her aim was not achieved; the Tories offered the best alternative. 

 

Then again, a Tory Government probably suits her Grievance agenda so there may be some perverse method in her madness. 

 

 

Hasn't the Scottish Parliament already agreed that there should be another one, only the PM in Westminster has said I won't let you have one, so essentially Sturgeon is in limbo until May deigns it.

 

The "triple lock" chat at the GE was no doubt an attempt to show May that Scotland would decide it's future.  Note the timing "after the Brexit process".  So we aren't even there yet.

 

SNP in independence wish shocker!

 

 

[deesidejambo]

8 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Yet you voted for a party in the General Election to specifically deny this!

 

 

 

Thats correct in a roundabout way although my vote was more intended to say No to Indy as opposed to No to another Referendum.     Ironically for me, I am one of those who would have it tomorrow to put it to bed, so yes, maybe I should have voted SNP to get it back on the table.  Silly me!  Dont let Spacey see this.

[Boris]

12 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Thats correct in a roundabout way although my vote was more intended to say No to Indy as opposed to No to another Referendum.     Ironically for me, I am one of those who would have it tomorrow to put it to bed, so yes, maybe I should have voted SNP to get it back on the table.  Silly me!  Dont let Spacey see this.

 

And you could also have had a clear conscience about voting Tory.  Oh well, next time Dee-Dee! 

 

FWIW, another indy ref would result in the same answer I reckon, maybe slightly more for Yes, but not quite a majority.

[Thunderstruck]

2 hours ago, Boris said:

 

Hasn't the Scottish Parliament already agreed that there should be another one, only the PM in Westminster has said I won't let you have one, so essentially Sturgeon is in limbo until May deigns it.

 

The "triple lock" chat at the GE was no doubt an attempt to show May that Scotland would decide it's future.  Note the timing "after the Brexit process".  So we aren't even there yet.

 

SNP in independence wish shocker!

 

 

 

The Parliament - the SNP and their Green (to use the term utilised for the DUP) lackeys - did vote to have another referendum. That, however, was clearly not the view of the Scottish voters who had passed a message to Sturgeon the previous May - hence the convenient conflation of Brexit vote with a vote for Indy. 

 

Spin her May 17 agenda how you like, it was a blatant attempt to make the GE a proxy Indy vote. As I said before, Sturgeon teed it up and Davidson hit it into the bleachers. 

 

But, “SNP in independence wish” certainly is a shocker if, to achieve their aim, they took such a short term view of politics that  they delivered us into another 5 years of Tory rule - if they believe that the Tories are as evil as they claim. 

[Cade]

SNP ran the GE on an anti-austerity ticket.

Tories ran on anti-independence.

Nobody knows what Labour were selling.

 

Turns out quite a few Scots don't mind being skint as long as they can wear union jack underwear.

[shaun.lawson]

Sorry, wrong thread!

Edited April 26, 2018 by shaun.lawson

[maroonlegions]

 

 

[Victorian]

Absolutely exposed as bare faced liars.    Tory backbenchers may well be thinking that the stonewall refusal to return to somewhere near the truth will damage their next election prospects.

[robbo1874]

4 hours ago, Victorian said:

Absolutely exposed as bare faced liars.    Tory backbenchers may well be thinking that the stonewall refusal to return to somewhere near the truth will damage their next election prospects.

You were right about her going. I'm shocked. 

I really thought she'd cling on .

This opens May up to further scrutiny as well.

This is a very shaky government imo. 

[Cade]

They can't help themselves but lie, lie and lie again and hope that the Daily Mail can save them by a combination of bumhole-licking "Tories are wonderful" and "What about that nasty Corbyn, eh?" pieces aimed at swaying public opinion.

 

 

[deesidejambo]

2 minutes ago, Cade said:

They can't help themselves but lie, lie and lie again and hope that the Daily Mail can save them by a combination of bumhole-licking "Tories are wonderful" and "What about that nasty Corbyn, eh?" pieces aimed at swaying public opinion.

 

 

But it won’t sway public opinion because people who read the Mail will already vote Tory.

[Boris]

10 hours ago, deesidejambo said:

But it won’t sway public opinion because people who read the Mail will already vote Tory.

 

But those headlines will be repeated on the TV and thus the narative is already framed to be pro-Tory, thus sending out a biased message.

[jambo lodge]

On ‎30‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 15:51, Boris said:

There is no doubt that Tories have made a real mess of the Windrush scandal. However for Labour to make any capital out of this they would have to trot out someone different than Diane Abbot or Jeremy Corbyn both of whom have no answers on how they would treat illegal immigrants. 

 

[jambo lodge]

On ‎30‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 15:51, Boris said:

 

 Apologies Boris , made a pigs ear of my last post. Was going to quote you then decided not.

[Boris]

1 minute ago, jambo lodge said:

 Apologies Boris , made a pigs ear of my last post. Was going to quote you then decided not.

 

No worries.  

 

The post above makes me look like Nostradamus!

 

I assume you wrote the text that is in the quotation box attributed to me?

 

If I may comment on that...you may have a point regards Corbyn and Abbot not having answers on how to treat illegal immigrants, but that is completely seperate to the Windrush scandal.

 

Whole point of Windruch being a scandal is that bona fide UK citizens are being treated as illegel immigrants.  So what Corbyn or abbot think (or don't) about how to deal with illegal immigrants is irrelevant to Windrush itself.

[Space Mackerel]

Here’s your new Home Secretary, another slippery ex banker same as Rudd.

 

 

Enjoy more of the same. 

 

[jambo lodge]

59 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

No worries.  

 

The post above makes me look like Nostradamus!

 

I assume you wrote the text that is in the quotation box attributed to me?

 

If I may comment on that...you may have a point regards Corbyn and Abbot not having answers on how to treat illegal immigrants, but that is completely seperate to the Windrush scandal.

 

Whole point of Windruch being a scandal is that bona fide UK citizens are being treated as illegel immigrants.  So what Corbyn or abbot think (or don't) about how to deal with illegal immigrants is irrelevant to Windrush itself.

I agree with you regarding Windrush and illegal immigrants, problem is Diane Abbott and Corbyn have often linked the two things together in interviews.  

[Boris]

Just now, jambo lodge said:

I agree with you regarding Windrush and illegal immigrants, problem is Diane Abbott and Corbyn have often linked the two things together in interviews.  

 

I suspect because of this Governments "hostile environment" policy.

 

There is a connection to the Govts immigration policy and Windrush.  Corbyn and Abbot need to focus on Windrush and not be sidetyracked with questions on illegal immigrant policy (but they still need to formulate something on it and soon!)

[jambo lodge]

1 hour ago, Space Mackerel said:

Here’s your new Home Secretary, another slippery ex banker same as Rudd.

 

 

Enjoy more of the same. 

 

Nothing much wrong with his interview. He knew about the schemes but didn't take advantage of them himself. I'm sure you know how to do business without paying VAT/TAX etc but wouldn't do it?

[maroonlegions]

Interesting poll here. 

 

Maybot"s time running out.

 

 

Poll: Britons blame May more than Rudd for Windrush scandal

 

Theresa May, formerly home secretary, is the main target for blame, with a majority saying her government is now unstable.

 

NEWS.SKY.COM

 

 

 

[Space Mackerel]

21 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Nothing much wrong with his interview. He knew about the schemes but didn't take advantage of them himself. I'm sure you know how to do business without paying VAT/TAX etc but wouldn't do it?

 

He was asked IF HE KNEW OF ANY SCHEMES within Deutche Bank which in turn he avoided the question time after time after time. 

 

Watch again. He was a banker for 20 years and estimated earnings well over £1m a year according to what I read. 

[Space Mackerel]

Quite apt this.

 

 

[Ulysses]

19 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

Interesting poll here. 

 

Maybot"s time running out.

 

 

Poll: Britons blame May more than Rudd for Windrush scandal

 

Theresa May, formerly home secretary, is the main target for blame, with a majority saying her government is now unstable.

 

NEWS.SKY.COM

 

 

 

 

Then she'll be replaced by Rees-Mogg.  Or Johnson.  Or Gove.  Or Hunt. 

 

Whoopee ****ing do.

 

[jack D and coke]

28 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

He was asked IF HE KNEW OF ANY SCHEMES within Deutche Bank which in turn he avoided the question time after time after time. 

 

Watch again. He was a banker for 20 years and estimated earnings well over £1m a year according to what I read. 

Don’t waste your time mate he’s more interested in anything the SNP do and battering away at that and getting his jimmys wet.

Turns a blind eye to absolutely everything the uk government does however. 

[maroonlegions]

18 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Then she'll be replaced by Rees-Mogg.  Or Johnson.  Or Gove.  Or Hunt. 

 

Whoopee ****ing do.

 

 

 

They are all the same to me mate.  Until they are voted out and all that, stuck with them,, whoopee doo right enough.

 

 

Theresa May suffers key Brexit defeat as House of Lords votes to kill off prospect of UK crashing out of the EU with no deal

 

INDEPENDENT.CO.UK

 

 

And she suffers yet another defeat in the House of Lords. 

 

Edited April 30, 2018 by maroonlegions

[The Comedian]

Doesn't taking a No Deal option off the table significantly weaken our negotiating position.

 

I guess that's the point. You just aren't allowed to leave the EU.

[jambo lodge]

37 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Don’t waste your time mate he’s more interested in anything the SNP do and battering away at that and getting his jimmys wet.

Turns a blind eye to absolutely everything the uk government does however. 

That's good debating.

[Victorian]

When you have the personal wealth of most current cabinet members,    are you really as fully committed to protecting the country's short, medium and long term economic prospects as the public might expect?     

 

£££×£££×£££×£££ = do you give a ****ing monkeys if there is a no deal / shite deal?

 

 

[maroonlegions]

So the UK  did removed legal protection for Windrush  immigrants in 2014 which was reported in the Guardian , yet new home Secretary Javid misleads the Commons by telling MPs that NO protections against deportation were  removed in 2014.

 

 

 

Carrying on were Rudd left off then.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2018 by maroonlegions

[Cade]

20 minutes ago, The Comedian said:

Doesn't taking a No Deal option off the table significantly weaken our negotiating position.

 

I guess that's the point. You just aren't allowed to leave the EU.

We don't have a negotiating position, just a list of impossible, stupid demands.

 

Brexit is a matter for Parliament as a whole to decide, not a scheme for a cabal of half a dozen Tory zealots to stitch-up however they wish.

[Seymour M Hersh]

17 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

So the UK  did removed legal protection for Windrush  immigrants in 2014 which was reported in the Guardian , yet new home Secretary Javid misleads the Commons by telling MPs that NO protections against deportation were  removed in 2014.

 

 

 

Carrying on were Rudd left off then.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Owen Jones takes complete fuddery to new levels. He's a complete welt.

[Seymour M Hersh]

17 minutes ago, Cade said:

We don't have a negotiating position, just a list of impossible, stupid demands.

 

Brexit is a matter for Parliament as a whole to decide, not a scheme for a cabal of half a dozen Tory zealots to stitch-up however they wish.

 

Please enlighten me as to these "stupid demands"?