Political Bollocks

Branch-Hopper

War Hero
European Parliament has just voted 544-126 in support of UK being given an article 50 extension should the request be made
Shame.
But to be expected - as the MEP's will be worried about who is funding their salaries/pensions/expenses/gravy train without UK finance.
 

Sumo

War Hero
Prorogation case

Irish input getting a bit of a kicking

Lavery gets huge telling off for going off piste talking too generally about Brexit. Judge warns him ‘don’t abuse our politeness. Don’t abuse Lady Hale’s patience’
 

Sumo

War Hero
:rolleyes:
Boris Johnson to tour country in big red bus with ‘There’s no press here’ on the side



"The Prime Minister has realised that blatant lies only really work when written on the side of a large red vehicle."

https://newsthump.com/2019/09/19/boris-johnson-to-tour-country-in-big-red-bus-with-theres-no-press-here-on-the-side/
Not blatant lies, he is a politician, it will be his version of the truth at that moment in time, if asked the same question later, the moment would have passed and another truth will be emitted? o_O
 

Sumo

War Hero
@huwshpis
I have been following the prorogation case for the last few days. Lady Hale made it clear that they were considering the impact of BREXIT.

Boris’s brief appears to be the only one to follow her brief and look at the question of judiciary and law.

All the others have banged on about BREXIT and it affects, even to the extent the Irish input was told to wind his neck in.

I feel that the government’s case looks good but who knows what 11 judges will think, agree with the English and Irish courts or the Scottish higher court?

What’s your take?
 

Sumo

War Hero
This one gets me, how John Major can be called to give his opinion, that this Proroguing of parliament stops parliamentary debate? unless he is classed as an expert in doing Proroguing.
Cash-for-questions affair (1997)
In 1997, John Major, the then prime minister, and leader of the Conservative and Unionist Party, controversially prorogued parliament at a time that avoided parliamentary debate of the Parliamentary Commissioner's report on the cash-for-questions affair.[14][15] On that occasion, the prorogation was on Friday, 21 March,[16] and was followed by a general election on 1 May, resulting in a change of government to Labour led by Tony Blair.
 

huwshpis

War Hero
@huwshpis
I have been following the prorogation case for the last few days. Lady Hale made it clear that they were considering the impact of BREXIT.

Boris’s brief appears to be the only one to follow her brief and look at the question of judiciary and law.

All the others have banged on about BREXIT and it affects, even to the extent the Irish input was told to wind his neck in.

I feel that the government’s case looks good but who knows what 11 judges will think, agree with the English and Irish courts or the Scottish higher court?

What’s your take?
I watched Monday afternoon's proceedings, didn't watch yesterday (I was in Canterbury) but got most of David (Lord) Pannick QC's argument this afternoon. He always makes a good case (I've known him for about 30+ years and worked with him), even if it's wrong. I didn't hear James Eadie QC for Boris, so haven't been able to get a feel for the way the judges were thinking about what he was saying, but I thought today that Kerr was not receptive to Pannick's argument (which is what I'd expect, having read quite a few of his judgments). Mary Arden I only know slightly (I did a case in front of her in the Court of Appeal two years ago) and she seemed to be looking to see if there was possibly a compromise way out. I've never had dealings with Lord Wilson or Lady Black, but Bob Carnwath and Philip Sales are sound, I just don't have a take on the way they're thinking. Brenda Hale (the President of the Court) sometimes lets you know how she's thinking (she did in a case I was in in 2010), but I haven't seen any sign of it this time. David Lloyd-Jones, whom I also know slightly, will, I think, take a cautious approach. Lord Hodge is an unknown quantity, as are Lords Kitchin and Reed.

I have read both the judgments of the Inner House of the Court of Session and of the Administrative Court. I think the Administrative Court got it right and the Inner House got it wrong, but I wouldn't put it past the Supreme Court to find a position midway between those two. We shall see early next week, according to Lady Hale.
 
You really, really don't 'get' satire do you?
There's quite a lot he doesn't get.

Sumo's day:

1. Wake up
2. Have shit
3. Change underpants (usually 'inside out')
4. Get breakfast. Coco Pops
5. Look at internet. CBBC Website
6. Look at BBC News. Try to work out what the fuck is going on. Apparently England is leaving the Soviet union or summat but its SO CONFUSING
7. Fire up Rum Ration. Maybe Slim knows
8. Slim = niggers/coons/immigrants/pakis
9. Paste twenty news items into board and ask people what they think. Maybe someone will summarise in language and terms a ten year old would understand
10. No one helps. Ask hwships.
11. Hwships responds. TL: DU.
12. Levers Aligned (cos I CAN see what he posts, but he's SO nasty): Slim -you're a racist cunt
13. Slim: dying on his arse
14. Have a shit. Change pants o/c
15. Repeat until bedtime and horlicks



levers
 

Sumo

War Hero
There's quite a lot he doesn't get.

Sumo's day:

1. Wake up
2. Have shit
3. Change underpants (usually 'inside out')
4. Get breakfast. Coco Pops
5. Look at internet. CBBC Website
6. Look at BBC News. Try to work out what the **** is going on. Apparently England is leaving the Soviet union or summat but its SO CONFUSING
7. Fire up Rum Ration. Maybe Slim knows
8. Slim = niggers/coons/immigrants/pakis
9. Paste twenty news items into board and ask people what they think. Maybe someone will summarise in language and terms a ten year old would understand
10. No one helps. Ask hwships.
11. Hwships responds. TL: DU.
12. Levers Aligned (cos I CAN see what he posts, but he's SO nasty): Slim -you're a racist ****
13. Slim: dying on his arse
14. Have a shit. Change pants o/c
15. Repeat until bedtime and horlicks



levers
1 out of 15 not bad for you
 

Sumo

War Hero
I watched Monday afternoon's proceedings, didn't watch yesterday (I was in Canterbury) but got most of David (Lord) Pannick QC's argument this afternoon. He always makes a good case (I've known him for about 30+ years and worked with him), even if it's wrong. I didn't hear James Eadie QC for Boris, so haven't been able to get a feel for the way the judges were thinking about what he was saying, but I thought today that Kerr was not receptive to Pannick's argument (which is what I'd expect, having read quite a few of his judgments). Mary Arden I only know slightly (I did a case in front of her in the Court of Appeal two years ago) and she seemed to be looking to see if there was possibly a compromise way out. I've never had dealings with Lord Wilson or Lady Black, but Bob Carnwath and Philip Sales are sound, I just don't have a take on the way they're thinking. Brenda Hale (the President of the Court) sometimes lets you know how she's thinking (she did in a case I was in in 2010), but I haven't seen any sign of it this time. David Lloyd-Jones, whom I also know slightly, will, I think, take a cautious approach. Lord Hodge is an unknown quantity, as are Lords Kitchin and Reed.

I have read both the judgments of the Inner House of the Court of Session and of the Administrative Court. I think the Administrative Court got it right and the Inner House got it wrong, but I wouldn't put it past the Supreme Court to find a position midway between those two. We shall see early next week, according to Lady Hale.
I see this as a difficult question, Millers team and the Scottish team, are stating, Boris acted unlawfully, but no one has been able to state which law, hence has Boris broken any law?
This is seen as a political process involving the monarch and the PM, even if he mislead the Queen, did he break any law?
Did he abuse his power as PM? It was stated more than once, that as the opposition is strong, it was in a position to stop Boris but for political reasons they didn't?
My take is Boris is in a fairly strong position, do the 11 judge's find with the lower courts of England, Scotland & Northern Ireland and say political not a court issue?
 

Top