Last one for the day.

Oops.

@Davesofthunder said in Brexit:

@Frank

The glib reply of someone who is not interested in what the will of the people actually is but just that "their side" won back in 2016 when project fear was being bandied about.

Of course project fear looks a little closer to reality now so clearly you fear a confirmation referendum on the facts about something so monumental to the UK long term future.

It's a straw man argument this "how many referendums"

Clearly one more is needed on the facts and options available before stepping off the cliff edge.

But I can see why you fear a second one....

Fuckin' hell. You are seriously suggesting ignore the will of the people because clearly they were too uninformed to know what was good for them.

There can be another referendum, but ONLY on points connected to leaving.

Because LEAVE won and REMAIN lost. End of.

Michael Tracey on the close link between intelligence officials and the media in the US.

@Crucial said in Brexit:

@Victor-Meldrew said in Brexit:

@Catogrande said in Brexit:

UK Revoke Article 50

"Revoke Article 50", "have another referendum" I just can't get my head around the utter stupidity of people who think this would resolve anything.

Don't these MP's think? Do they expect the 17.2m who voted to leave to simply shrug their shoulders and accept staying in the EU or to respect the result of a 2nd referendum if the vote is to remain? Dangerous naivety of a staggering degree.

The dangers of a winner takes all referendum. At the moment the 16.4m who voted to remain are being expected to shrug their shoulders an accept leaving.

Lets keep having referendums until the Remainers get the result they want - then we can say the will of the people has spoken.

@Rocky-Rockbottom
Agreed.
Kind of like those who believed Brett Kavanaugh was a sexual abuser despite there being no corroborating evidence..................

@Tim That is a superb article Tim. Thanks for posting that.

I am wondering if Russiagate was a story seeded in the eager Trump hating US media bloodstream to cover up another purpose. Clearly it was intended to harm Trump's Presidency, but I also wonder if there were certain actions (i.e, illegal surveillance on an opposition campaign) that needed ex-post-facto justification.

To put it another way, I wonder if the scandal is bigger than just lying press. I am hoping Barr investigates this fully. I mean it's not like Brennan has a history of surveillance overreach is it?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/31/cia-admits-spying-senate-staffers

@Salacious-Crumb said in US Politics:

I hope history records that these deep state scammers and their idiot press stenoographers hated Trump so much they were willing to start a war with Russia. What still irks me is that press agencies & organizations around the world, including NZH almost daily, regurgitated this garbage and pretended it was high-minded seriousness and that anybody who questioned the paranoid Democratic Party conspiracy theory orthodoxy could only have been an alt-right racist.

There will no accountability on the part of the press - none.

There may be accountability for those who opened this investigation if it is determined by AG Barr that the the FBI or DOJ under Obama were acting with political intent.

I predict the Democrats' next stage will be to imply a cover-up on behalf of the AG William Barr when he inevitably has to redact or not give the full report to Congress.

So now it's going to be Super 14 from the Super 18.
bye bye Sunwolves = 17
Who are the other 3 sides being given the boot?