Wait until Bruno finds out who Her Majesty has honoured.
Sir Robert Mugabe for starters.
On the advice of her then Prime Minister John Major....in 1994.
Who advised Macron to do it, and if it was such a great idea, why did the French not issue any photographs?
As we saw with the prorogation crisis the Queen will do anything her PM tells her to do, including unlawful stuff, and we call ourselves a democracy.
Our constitution is based on Crown in Parliament, the Crown will never overturn a bill passed by both Houses of Parliament but otherwise the PM has full prerogative powers over the rest as the Crown's chief minister
So if Parliament passed a modern day Edict of Expulsion the Queen would pass it?
Wouldn't matter if she did or not. The second a monarch doesn't given royal assent parliament would either get rid of the monarchy or pass a rule that worked around it, like Belgium did according to wikipedia.
There's many reasons to have a republic - pretending to be mad that the monarch doesn't exercise actual power to overrule the democratic representatives (even doing something awful) is not one of them. At least not one someone could claim with a straight face. "It's crazy we have a monarch in a democratic society; and did you hear how they didn't go against the democratic parliament?"
Precisely. I'm a republican too but not because of any of that. The Queen is a glorified clerk signing what Parliament tells her to and doing what the PM says. Replacing her with a functionary who did the same thing wouldn't change anything.
the cesspit that is the SNP for more than 20 years
You seem to be getting a bit unhinged about this lately. Coming from a Tory it also inspires cogitations upon motes and beams.
I am not a member of the Tory party. And their decision to cancel the exams yesterday really pissed me off.
But even the SNP themselves have acknowledged that some of their keyboard warriors are less than helpful to the cause.
Yep, well keyboard warriors do not a party make, as I'm sure the SCons would be the first to claim when the assorted Union flag shaggers, racists, Trumpers, sectarian bigots and bleach drinkers who tweet support for them are highlighted. Well, the SCons who aren't any of these things anyway.
The SNP is apparently an organisation campaigning for independence. Why knew? 🤷♀️
It certainly induces a weary sense of déjà vu. Since a goodly portion of indy support appears to believe that the SNP are not campaigning for independence, perhaps Union Jack should try the SNP are anti independence line, for variety if nothing else.
How do these absolute cretins get where they are, seems IQ of a gnat is required for ministerial office.
Yep, Safe Harbor Day has come and gone, giving yet greater certainty to Biden's win, and the Betfair market has duly reacted -
Trump steams in to 20s.
It may not appear much in the news but the State of Texas, with the backing of a number of other states, is suing PA, GA Wisconsin and Michigan.
I'm no lawyer but the case involves changes to election rules made by the states being sued, which Texas alleges are illegal.
Only the Supreme Court can deliberate in legal disputes between states, as I understand it. This is serious.
Much as you would like to see a Trump coup (for reasons that are entirely beyond me) this case is not serious, it's frivlolous. It has zero chance of success.
If only because there's no way SCOTUS is going to open the door to states suing each other for enacting laws they don't like: for a start, states like NY with strong gun control laws would see the door open to sue states with weak gun control laws for enabling a supply of illegal firearms across state lines.
Yes, agree on that, @rpjs, as you said, the ramifications would be huge if you took it to the logical conclusions and your example is a good one. Plenty of others too.
I guess (for me anyway) the real interesting question is why Texas (and others) have got themselves involved with this, especially as Texas has been cooperative with states on other matters and, as you said, you would assume the chances are close to zero. It could be a bit of virtual signalling to the Trump base that they tried to do something, it could be the Republicans trying to get SCOTUS to say something about common standards for federal elections or it could be Ted Cruz prodding the Texas AG to come out with this so it helps his chances with Trump / his fan base in 2024.
They got involved because the politicians in question saw electoral value in the next Primary season from being seen as a big supporter of President Trump!
It's really that simple. It's exactly the same stupid reason - narrow, temporary political advantage - that sees Keir Starmer instagram a picture of himself on one knee.
Oh I'd agree with that which is why I think Cruz has got something to do with it (and with his comment he would have presented the PA case to SCOTUS).
The case from TX has been described as a “press release masquerading as a lawsuit.” by a law professor.
Which sounds like a fair description. However, other states have joined in, which may (or may not) have an influence. I'd be interested to see what happens if someone like Florida joined.
If you were an ambitious Secretary of State in Wyoming or Florida or wherever, why wouldn't you sign up?
Wait until Bruno finds out who Her Majesty has honoured.
Sir Robert Mugabe for starters.
On the advice of her then Prime Minister John Major....in 1994.
Who advised Macron to do it, and if it was such a great idea, why did the French not issue any photographs?
As we saw with the prorogation crisis the Queen will do anything her PM tells her to do, including unlawful stuff, and we call ourselves a democracy.
Our constitution is based on Crown in Parliament, the Crown will never overturn a bill passed by both Houses of Parliament but otherwise the PM has full prerogative powers over the rest as the Crown's chief minister
So if Parliament passed a modern day Edict of Expulsion the Queen would pass it?
Her Majesty interfering in the legislative process is as unthinkable as a deputy editor of this website resorting to below-the-line trolling.
However, separate figures tracking the size of London's outbreak show no spike in hospital admissions or deaths, which have barely risen over the past two months.
NHS data shows just 145 Covid patients are being admitted to hospital every day, on average. In contrast, they topped 800 during the peak of the first wave in April. And Department of Health statistics show the capital is just recording 25 coronavirus deaths a day — a fraction of the scale of the city's crisis in April.
So seems like cases have risen in London recently, but so far hospital admissions and deaths have remained way below spring (unlike Lombardy / New York).
But of course lag and situations can change rapidly. Too many people doing a Kay Burley, especially over Christmas...
Wait until Bruno finds out who Her Majesty has honoured.
Sir Robert Mugabe for starters.
On the advice of her then Prime Minister John Major....in 1994.
Who advised Macron to do it, and if it was such a great idea, why did the French not issue any photographs?
As we saw with the prorogation crisis the Queen will do anything her PM tells her to do, including unlawful stuff, and we call ourselves a democracy.
Our constitution is based on Crown in Parliament, the Crown will never overturn a bill passed by both Houses of Parliament but otherwise the PM has full prerogative powers over the rest as the Crown's chief minister
So if Parliament passed a modern day Edict of Expulsion the Queen would pass it?
Her Majesty interfering in the legislative process is as unthinkable as a deputy editior of this website resorting to below-the-line trolling.
So as I understand it the thing with Murrell is he allegedly sent WhatsApp messages suggesting deeply inappropriate action in the Salmond investigation .
So the question is did he send them, and more importantly who to?
Both of those questions seem far more important than whether he has WhatsApp installed on his phone or not.
And Shirley if these messages exist they can be produced via the recipients phone. And if the recipient doesn't want to share the messages then how on earth does anyone know about them and their content?
IIRC If you delete messages in WhatsApp, which have been read by the recipient, then they still have the message.
So if you have an account, you can be forced (under UK law) to unlock your account for the court. If you delete messages, that leaves a "deleted" indicator... and if the recipient still has them....
they have been shared already , I believe they were in papers and online , perhaps he used a friend's phone.
So as I understand it the thing with Murrell is he allegedly sent WhatsApp messages suggesting deeply inappropriate action in the Salmond investigation .
So the question is did he send them, and more importantly who to?
Both of those questions seem far more important than whether he has WhatsApp installed on his phone or not.
And Shirley if these messages exist they can be produced via the recipients phone. And if the recipient doesn't want to share the messages then how on earth does anyone know about them and their content?
The belief of the Salmondistas, AIUI, is that Murrell was encouraging members to complain to the police to encourage them to take action against Salmond which ultimately resulted in his trial in revenge for his humiliation of the Scottish Government in the Judicial review. Murrell doesn't seem to dispute sending tweets to this effect but claims that they were irrelevant because Salmond had already been charged at the time.
There may be timing issues here because my understanding is that not all of the complainers came forward at the same time but the slightly desperate search for other social media platforms does seem to suggest that the evidence supporting this belief may be slight.
Or just maybe Murrell has not survived as the Chief Executive of the cesspit that is the SNP for more than 20 years without being a bit more careful about covering his tracks.
Maybe, I hope I'm wrong, I saw some stats earlier which showed London really was heading for Tier 3.
I should have prefaced with so far. I haven't checked the past couple of weeks, so you might be right that the situation is heading the wrong direction.
London and the Home Counties are the places to watch. They are the ones (in England) with rising case numbers at the moment heading up to Xmas. Not a third wave, but a second wave that has moved South and East.
Wait until Bruno finds out who Her Majesty has honoured.
Sir Robert Mugabe for starters.
On the advice of her then Prime Minister John Major....in 1994.
Who advised Macron to do it, and if it was such a great idea, why did the French not issue any photographs?
As we saw with the prorogation crisis the Queen will do anything her PM tells her to do, including unlawful stuff, and we call ourselves a democracy.
Our constitution is based on Crown in Parliament, the Crown will never overturn a bill passed by both Houses of Parliament but otherwise the PM has full prerogative powers over the rest as the Crown's chief minister
So if Parliament passed a modern day Edict of Expulsion the Queen would pass it?
Her Majesty interfering in the legislative process is as unthinkable as a deputy editor of this website resorting to below-the-line trolling.
And Sturgeon, Drakeford and Foster - it was a UK wide decision
Very much under protest for Ms S. I think she will turn out to have been right.
The seamless transition from 'Sturge was wrong to pursue a different policy from Westminster' to 'Sturge was wrong to pursue the same policy as Westminster' will be a joy to witness.
I do wonder what will happen if she tries to cancel Christmas. On second thoughts, I do know.
Nationalist Governments can't afford to take unpopular decisions like that - she would only have cancelled Christmas so if given cover by the other home nations, and she'd have probably tried to cancel it 'a bit less' than England because 'Scotland is in a much better place'. It has to be bread and circuses all the way till the goal is achieved.
Unionists still whining and whinging , can you not comment on your donkey DROSS the make believe Tory imaginary Scottish Tory party leader
If rich countries are "hoarding" doses I'd think the bigger picture would be why they're not using them?
Yes the UK has bought more than we'd need, we didn't know though if all would work or not. If Pfizer had failed then having fingers in other pies would be good. If all come good then you'd have to be special to believe the UK would hoard and not use hundreds of millions of doses rather than send them overseas perhaps as foreign aid once we are done with ourselves. 🤦🏻♂️
It makes you wonder about New York and Lombardy...all these theories of any significant underlying natural immunity can go out the window, because huge percentages of people got hit in the spring and it has happened again now.
Wait until Bruno finds out who Her Majesty has honoured.
Sir Robert Mugabe for starters.
On the advice of her then Prime Minister John Major....in 1994.
Who advised Macron to do it, and if it was such a great idea, why did the French not issue any photographs?
I wonder who HMQ has decided to honour off her own bat. You'd imagine perhaps some of the Palace functionaries, but perhaps those are suggested to her.
Oddly, despite the endless cards and flowers I send, she's not done the decent thing yet! Any old viceroyship would do.
Not really. Have to wonder how many of the "wrong sort of washing powder brings out a minor rash" allergic types will use as an excuse to duck it mind.
Wait until Bruno finds out who Her Majesty has honoured.
Sir Robert Mugabe for starters.
On the advice of her then Prime Minister John Major....in 1994.
Who advised Macron to do it, and if it was such a great idea, why did the French not issue any photographs?
As we saw with the prorogation crisis the Queen will do anything her PM tells her to do, including unlawful stuff, and we call ourselves a democracy.
Our constitution is based on Crown in Parliament, the Crown will never overturn a bill passed by both Houses of Parliament but otherwise the PM has full prerogative powers over the rest as the Crown's chief minister
So if Parliament passed a modern day Edict of Expulsion the Queen would pass it?
Her Majesty interfering in the legislative process is as unthinkable as a deputy editior of this website resorting to below-the-line trolling.
It makes you wonder about New York and Lombardy...all these theories of any significant underlying natural immunity can go out the window, because huge percentages of people got hit in the spring and it has happened again now.
Wait until Bruno finds out who Her Majesty has honoured.
Sir Robert Mugabe for starters.
On the advice of her then Prime Minister John Major....in 1994.
Who advised Macron to do it, and if it was such a great idea, why did the French not issue any photographs?
As we saw with the prorogation crisis the Queen will do anything her PM tells her to do, including unlawful stuff, and we call ourselves a democracy.
Our constitution is based on Crown in Parliament, the Crown will never overturn a bill passed by both Houses of Parliament but otherwise the PM has full prerogative powers over the rest as the Crown's chief minister
So if Parliament passed a modern day Edict of Expulsion the Queen would pass it?
Her Majesty interfering in the legislative process is as unthinkable as a deputy editor of this website resorting to below-the-line trolling.
Comments
NHS data shows just 145 Covid patients are being admitted to hospital every day, on average. In contrast, they topped 800 during the peak of the first wave in April. And Department of Health statistics show the capital is just recording 25 coronavirus deaths a day — a fraction of the scale of the city's crisis in April.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9029671/amp/Londons-Covid-cases-higher-Englands-lockdown.html
So seems like cases have risen in London recently, but so far hospital admissions and deaths have remained way below spring (unlike Lombardy / New York).
But of course lag and situations can change rapidly. Too many people doing a Kay Burley, especially over Christmas...
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/12/09/944539982/u-k-regulators-tell-people-with-severe-allergies-not-to-get-vaccine?t=1607538719427
I'm guessing that's them being overly cautious.
Not a third wave, but a second wave that has moved South and East.
If rich countries are "hoarding" doses I'd think the bigger picture would be why they're not using them?
Yes the UK has bought more than we'd need, we didn't know though if all would work or not. If Pfizer had failed then having fingers in other pies would be good. If all come good then you'd have to be special to believe the UK would hoard and not use hundreds of millions of doses rather than send them overseas perhaps as foreign aid once we are done with ourselves. 🤦🏻♂️
Oddly, despite the endless cards and flowers I send, she's not done the decent thing yet! Any old viceroyship would do.
https://twitter.com/Jord_an1/status/1336044936144228357
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/tv/nigella-lawson-goes-viral-pronunciation-19420223
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festa_del_Redentore
The best fireworks I've ever seen.