Brexit, for once some facts.

[Kudoscycles]

All of that will be great,or preferable to full brexit in the way gangrene is preferable to being decapitated. As that preferred outcome happens we will still take very serious economic damage. For no reason at all,other than boris and farages careers.

I agree,except I don't like your clinical analogies,I am about to eat some toast with red jam!
If the upside is Boris and Farage careers,I cannot see it has done either of them much good either!
Ironically,if the vote had been split similarly but the other way I am not sure that would have achieved much,it was a silly mechanism to enter into,which was too complex for an IN/OUT vote,I am sure most didn't understand the effects both short and long term....maybe over the next few months when everything is increasing in cost,this will hit the poor the most and may cause people to reconsider.
Still haven't seen an upside yet,not even the vision of one!!!!
KudosDave

 

[Kudoscycles]

Flecc,
I have been googling like mad but cannot find out what Leadsom lied about.

She said that she was the preferred candidate for PM because she had children and May hadn't. She then regretted that statement and tried to lie her way out of It,denying she ever said it.
But the respected journalist had kept a transcript of the interview,which pretty much confirmed she had said it,foolishly in hindsight,so she tried to lie her way out again.
I think that is the basis of it,but don't shoot the messenger.
KudosDave

 

[oldgroaner]

This is all quite disturbing as eliminating a Tory politician because they lied means they will never be able to elect a prime minister!

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
Could it be that the referendum has at last taught them a lesson?[emoji1]

 

[Kudoscycles]

Try googling 'Ryanair Brexit' to see his view ,in an interview with Fortune magazine,I respect that I am a small business but O'Leary thoughts seem to echo mine,whatever you think of O'Leary he is a bright guy.
He thinks that we will have such devastating economic times in the next 2 years that we will be forced to announce we are not leaving or that we will leave but have such awful leave terms that our net contribution without voting rights could be £19 billion and no rebate for the farmers.
KudosDave

 

[mike killay]

She said that she was the preferred candidate for PM because she had children and May hadn't. She then regretted that statement and tried to lie her way out of It,denying she ever said it.
But the respected journalist had kept a transcript of the interview,which pretty much confirmed she had said it,foolishly in hindsight,so she tried to lie her way out again.
I think that is the basis of it,but don't shoot the messenger.
KudosDave

Thanks Kudos.
Does seem a bit below the belt.
But as OG observes, where do we find a politician that does not lie?

 

[flecc]

Flecc,
I have been googling like mad but cannot find out what Leadsom lied about.

When she was being interviewed by a newspaper reporter she said that since she had children, that meant she had a greater stake in the countrty than someone without. She then went on to say Theresa May has no children so was not in the same position. Then to rub it in she went on to again repeat she had children, emphasising the word children, adding that they in turn would go on to have children, still futher growing her stake in the country.

That was clearly politically stupid and immediately earnt her harsh criticism from her colleagues in the party since it was insulting to the singles and those who couldn't have children for various reasons.

Her response was to say that she had been led into speaking of her children by the reporter who'd trapped her into what she said.

Fortunately the female reporter had recorded the whole thing, revealing that Leadsome had blatantly lied. I listened to that recording and the reporter had not spoken at all in any of Leadsomes statement about her children, it was entirely of her own making.

Her attempting to blame an entirely innocent reporter has rightly disgusted many of her colleagues. We all expect politicians to lie about what they say and their colleagues, but there are limits and making an innocent member of the electorate a victim of her lies makes Leadsome completely unsuited to any high office.
.

 

[flecc]

What a disreputable lot the Brexit lead campaigners have turned out to be, all of them promising to lead us into a better future outside of the EU.

So when they won the referendum, what did they do?

Nigel Farage immediately retired.

Boris Johnson in typical style reneged and ducked out of responsibility at the first excuse.

Michael Gove shafted Johnson and then also showed no willing, insisting he never wanted to be PM anyway.

Andrea Leadsome by the worst form off lying shows herself to be unfit for office.

And Chris Grayling, leader of the House of Commons who vigorously campaigned for Brexit has, since the vote, been strongly backing Remainer Theresa May against the Brexiters.

These are the two-faced ba$tards those wishing to leave the EU believed and supported. They were had.
.

 

[BrendanJ]

1. The referendum is not policy,it is only advisory,Theresa May will do nothing of substance until 2020 or the next General Election,whichever,comes soonest.
2. I agree,with the maths as they stand,there will be no vote,Article 50 would be voted down by parliament.
Theresa May would not use the whip,we know that there are only 84 ardent Euro Sceptics in the Tory MPs,for that is the number who voted for Leadsom,she would not want an attack on her authority so early in her term.
How do you suggest that Article 50 would be triggered without a vote in parliament?
I am not a dreamer,I am looking at the cold hard facts,Parliament will ignore this referendum,even with the whip the numbers just don't add up.
It would be a different matter if Leadsome won the PM,she seems a definite Brexit and would try to use the Queens prerogative to get it through but Mischon de Reya,is backed by some heavy hitters who will ensure that option is not available.
The outcome of this referendum was not thought through because Cameron never thought he would lose it,now there are massive legal and practical obstacles to overcome if the 17 million are to get their way,is Theresa May not just a female Cameron,very tepid Brexit.
Time will tell,who is right.
KudosDave

Cold hard facts my arse,
Just read your post again and count the number of facts and count the number of opinions. If you stated them as opinions ok, we could have a reasoned debate and share opinions and maybe learn something from each other
You are an extremist and just like most of those nutters have somewere departed from reason, just now its how far will you go
Absolute bonkers

 

[tillson]

I don't think even the loyal party members will select Leadsome after her disgraceful behaviour in blatantly trying to blame an entirely innocent journalist for her own stupidity. Even her own colleagues and supporters were shocked by this despicable behaviour. There's little doubt if it had happened before MP's voting, they would have dropped Leadsome and Gove would have been going forward against May.
.

Why, what has she done, taken a dump in Theresa May's handbag?

 

[tillson]

What a disreputable lot the Brexit lead campaigners have turned out to be, all of them promising to lead us into a better future outside of the EU.

So when they won the referendum, what did they do?

Nigel Farage immediately retired.

Boris Johnson in typical style reneged and ducked out of responsibility at the first excuse.

Michael Gove shafted Johnson and then also showed no willing, insisting he never wanted to be PM anyway.

Andrea Leadsome by the worst form off lying shows herself to be unfit for office.

And Chris Grayling, leader of the House of Commons who vigorously campaigned for Brexit has, since the vote, been strongly backing Remainer Theresa May against the Brexiters.

These are the two-faced ba$tards those wishing to leave the EU believed and supported. They were had.
.

I do have to agree with you here. Following a successful campaign to leave the EU, everyone went AWOL and Gove has displayed contemptible treachery. Not a good start.

 

[derf]

Why, what has she done, taken a dump in Theresa May's handbag?

That wouldn't have been surprising. Perhaps even less damaging. Being prepared to destroy someone else's career/profession/livelihood as part of smearing a journalist in an attempt to lie/cover her tracks is pretty damning.

 

[oldgroaner]

That wouldn't have been surprising. Perhaps even less damaging. Being prepared to destroy someone else's career/profession/livelihood as part of smearing a journalist in an attempt to lie/cover her tracks is pretty damning.

Huh that's nothing compared with the lies that have been told blaming the EU for everything but the weather, is it?
Of course they lie, always have, always will.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[Croxden]

Huh that's nothing compared with the lies that have been told blaming the EU for everything but the weather, is it?
Of course they lie, always have, always will.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

We had better weather before we joined I'm sure, it must be them.

 

[shemozzle999]

"Retired" Nigel Farage on LBC this morning for 2 hours.

 

[RobF]

Bellowing 'liar' at Andrea Leadsom is a bit over the top.

The gynaecologically blessed Mrs Leadsome tried to score a political point over the bereft Mrs May.

It all went a bit Pete Tong after that, but it's really no more than a minor squall in a tiny teacup.

 

[flecc]

Why, what has she done, taken a dump in Theresa May's handbag?

I explained in detail in this post.
.

 

[derf]

"Retired" Nigel Farage on LBC this morning for 2 hours.

aaarggghh. i dreaded that. why is it always teh worng peopel who get an infarct? that would retire him. god knows, unless he's already had one.

 

[derf]

Bellowing 'liar' at Andrea Leadsom is a bit over the top.

The gynaecologically blessed Mrs Leadsome tried to score a political point over the bereft Mrs May.

It all went a bit Pete Tong after that, but it's really no more than a minor squall in a tiny teacup.

i disagree. how would you have felt if you were the journalist. and you didnt have a record/transcript of the conversation. and you lost your job and got sued for defamation? suddenly not funny or unserious at all.

 

[flecc]

it's really no more than a minor squall in a tiny teacup.

Blaming an entirely innocent outsider is far more than that, it was thoroughly despicable behaviour, showing how unfit for high office Andrea Leadsome is.

Imagine if that female reporter had not kept a recording of the interview, where would have that left her editor? On the one hand the possible soon-to-be prime minister with one version, on the other the reporter's protests. At the very least the editor would have doubts and the reporter's career could have been damaged.

The decent thing would have been for Leadsome either to have apologised for what she said about the children advantage, or to have said she didn't mean things the way others were seeing them.

N.B. Crossed with Derf's post above.
.

 

[RobF]

i disagree. how would you have felt if you were the journalist. and you didnt have a record/transcript of the conversation. and you lost your job and got sued for defamation? suddenly not funny or unserious at all.

Leadsom claimed the journalist slanted the story, it will have happened to the journalist many times in the past.

The journalist has defended her position in public, which is fine, but that's really an end to it from the journalist/politician perspective.

The only people at risk of being sued for defamation are those who are, without foundation, calling Leadsom a liar.

There is a custom that politicians accept being called liars as part of the rough and tumble of politics.

In many cases, the keyboard warriors who make these allegations haven't got a pot to pee in, so aren't worth going after anyway.

But it could happen.

in that event, the only defence is justification - the defamatory remark was true.

Very difficult to prove when you were not present when the alleged lie was told.