UK Gov In Turmoil & Bexit Mess.

[Blackleaf]

I see no problem in the Supreme Court, the successor to the Law Lords, ruling on whether government actions comport with the constitution.

The Supreme Court didn't do that. They did the opposite.
As the Government's Brexiteer Attorney General Geoffrey Cox - a great candidate for future PM, in my opinion - told the Commons early this afternoon in his loud booming voice when he was really giving it two barrels to the Remainers- The Supreme Court didn't uphold the British Constitution, because the proroguing of parliament has long been a lawful right of British PMs. The Supreme Court actually slightly evolved English Common Law and the "unwritten" British constitution to make such proroguings illegal when they weren't before.

In other words, wealthy Remainers have gone to a court packed with wealthy and UNELECTED Remainers - in a country where we traditionally like courts to stay out of politics - to get that court to INVENT a new law which says this prorogation was illegal.

By the way, the High Court of England and Wales found Johnson's prorogation perfectly legal.

So what's going on here? Is one court packed with people who don't understand the law and wrongfully declared it legal (surely all courts should give the same verdict on a mater of law) or is one court corrupt and packed with people all on one side of the Brexit debate?

My guess is that it's the latter - and it's the Supreme Court.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

The Supreme Court didn't do that. They did the opposite.
As the Government's Brexiteer Attorney General Geoffrey Cox - a great candidate for future PM, in my opinion - told the Commons early this afternoon in his loud booming voice when he was really giving it two barrels to the Remainers- The Supreme Court didn't uphold the British Constitution, because the proroguing of parliament has long been a lawful right of British PMs. The Supreme Court actually slightly evolved English Common Law and the "unwritten" British constitution to make such proroguings illegal when they weren't before.
In other words, wealthy Remainers have gone to a court packed with wealthy and UNELECTED Remainers - in a country where we traditionally like courts to stay out of politics - to get that court to INVENT a new law which says this prorogation was illegal.
By the way, the High Court of England and Wales found Johnson's prorogation perfectly legal.
So what's going on here? Is one court packed with people who don't understand the law and wrongfully declared it legal (surely all courts should give the same verdict on a mater of law) or is one court corrupt and packed with people all on one side of the Brexit debate?
My guess is that it's the latter - and it's the Supreme Court.

And the High Court of Scotland found the other way. That's how it wound up in the Supreme Court in the first place.

Funny how you're dodging the questions.

 

[Hoid]

Boris is set to make Bercow the first Speaker in 230 years to not get a peerage.

it would be a better story if he had a majority

 

[Blackleaf]

And the High Court of Scotland found the other way. That's how it wound up in the Supreme Court in the first place.
Funny how you're dodging the questions.

So you've got one court saying it was legal and two saying it was illegal.

So who's right and who's wrong?

At least one court is packed with lawyers and judges who don't understand the law.

Or, at least one court is biased and corrupt and has deliberately come out with a decision it knows to be wrong.

I think it's the latter.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

So you've got one court saying it was legal and two saying it was illegal.
So who's right and who's wrong?

The superior court of the three. You didn't know that?

So, was it anti-democratic when British courts rejected government actions to trample the rights of the people, like arbitrary searches?

And was it anti-democratic when the Republicans impeached Clinton?

 

[Blackleaf]

The superior court of the three. You didn't know that?

So, was it anti-democratic when British courts rejected government actions to trample the rights of the people, like arbitrary searches?

And was it anti-democratic when the Republicans impeached Clinton?

How can it be anti-democratic for courts to argue for the RIGHTS of the people, you idiot?

As for courts rejecting government actions to trample the rights of the people: the Supreme Court has done the opposite. It has shown it is an ENEMY of the people in making a decision against that democratic decision the people made in June 2016.

It is the Supreme Court trampling over the rights of the people, not Johnson. He's a democrat - and that's why he's well ahead in the polls.

And that's why we'll win.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

How can it be anti-democratic for courts to argue for the RIGHTS of the people, you idiot?

Because those governments were democratically elected.

As to idiots, I'm not the one who didn't know the term is "precedent," not "precedence," and that the Supreme Court is superior to the High Courts of England and Wales and Scotland.

 

[Blackleaf]

Because those governments were democratically elected.

Unelected judges should not be dictating to the elected British government what it can and can't do. Britain is (or was) a democracy, not a kritarchy.

This government was elected to deliver Brexit. Boris the democrat is trying to do that, but the Remainers with their wealthy backers toddling off to courts packed with wealthy Remainer "justices" are trying to stop him.

The Supreme Court is the enemy of the people and democracy.

As to idiots, I'm not the one who didn't know the term is "precedent," not "precedence," and that the Supreme Court is superior to the High Courts of England and Wales and Scotland.

Are you saying the Supreme Court is packed with a higher calibre of lawyer than the High Court and that High Court lawyers don't really know the law of England & Wales?

 

[Curious Cdn]

Unelected judges should not be dictating to the elected British government what it can and can't do. Britain is (or was) a democracy, not a kritarchy.
This government was elected to deliver Brexit. Boris the democrat is trying to do that, but the Remainers with their wealthy backers toddling off to courts packed with wealthy Remainer "justices" are trying to stop him.
The Supreme Court is the enemy of the people and democracy.
Are you saying the Supreme Court is packed with a higher calibre of lawyer than the High Court and that High Court lawyers don't really know the law of England & Wales?

So, an unelected Prime Minister suspends the democratically elected House of Parliament illegally and is therefore doing Democracy's bidding? What did I miss?

Oh,yes ... a dodgy, single referendum giving zero details about what Brexit involves three years ago.

So therefore, you should be okay with a second referendum.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

The Supreme Court is the enemy of the people and democracy.

BL

Those are pwerful accusations........and one better have a lotof hard evidence to support it.

 

[Curious Cdn]

Now Boris Johnson the Unelected who lied to the Queen ... Now HE'S a friend of democracy!

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Are you saying the Supreme Court is packed with a higher calibre of lawyer than the High Court and that High Court lawyers don't really know the law of England & Wales?

No, I'm saying you're the ignorant lager lout who didn't know until I told you that the Supreme Court is superior to the High Court.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

BL
Those are pwerful accusations........and one better have a lotof hard evidence to support it.

Why? It's not like anybody's going to give a shit what an ignorant lager lout in Bolton thinks or says.

 

[Blackleaf]

Now Boris Johnson the Unelected who lied to the Queen ... Now HE'S a friend of democracy!

How do you know he lied to the Queen? In fact, how does ANYONE know? Only he and the Queen were in the room. Nobody apart from them knows what Boris said.

In fact, the Supreme Court did NOT say that Boris lied to the Queen.

And I'm not going to bother explaining to you again how a parliamentary democracy works. It obviously goes way over your head.

 

[Blackleaf]

No, I'm saying you're the ignorant lager lout who didn't know until I told you that the Supreme Court is superior to the High Court.

Are you sure about that, loser?

 

[Blackleaf]

BL
Those are pwerful accusations........and one better have a lotof hard evidence to support it.

Well, you know me...

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Are you sure about that, loser?

Sure am, lager lout.

And you're hoping to someday be qualified on a forklift. You're not in a real good position to call somebody else a loser.

 

[Blackleaf]

And you're hoping to someday be qualified on a forklift.

Well I already am. I got my licence in Wigan in 2015.

And by the way, please don't call me thick because I'm working class and common. That's what the Remainers do. And it makes me very angry.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Well I already am. I got my licence in Wigan in 2015.
And by the way, please don't call me thick because I'm working class and common. That's what the Remainers do. And it makes me very angry.

I know lots of working-class people who are smarter'n a whip. Heck, I used to be one.

You're not one of them. You're a working-class lager lout who, purely by coincidence, is thick as two planks.

Congratulations on the forklift license. Good luck with your arduous study on the flexi truck.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Well, you know me...

Seems that all this has to be upsetting for everyone.......regardless of which camp one is in. Any form of confusion or chaos at top government levels is a problem for everyone. It also leaves a nation vulnerable.....and if one wants to remain in a positive bargaining position........of strength......perhaps a different tactics is called for. The UK has overcome a lot and has a long history.....of change and challenges........It will over come this too. You are watching history unfold...& that itself is momentous.