Only that one argument raised was that those continuing to advocate remain were ignoring the wishes of the majority …..

…. But the last thing I want is a Brexit discussion.

but I'm open to be persuaded otherwise.

Dec 19, 2019 at 3:54 PM AK

What sort of "Independence" for Scotland does a Vote for the SNP imply?

GC. The SNP manifesto called for a referendum upon Scottish independence to be held in 2020. The GE results clearly indicate support for the SNP is dominant within Scotland. Boris doesn't appear to be listening to the Scots who voted last week.

AK, I have sadly (as I would regret the break-up of the UK) come to the conclusion that the Scots should be given another referendum on independence. I think the logic for it is there. The Scots voted to remain in the UK before the UK voted to leave the EU, while the Scots voted to stay in the EU. The strong showing by the SNP suggests that a lot of Scots are unhappy at their pro-EU membership views being overridden by the rest of the UK (mostly England, in reality). The SNP's claim that circumstances have changed sufficiently to justify another vote is, I think, a strong one.

If they truly want to leave the UK, then so be it. Unlike many remainers (e.g. the Lib Dems - who opposed Scottish independence and opposed Brexit, but wanted only the Brexit referendum to be re-run, since the Scottish independence referendum gave them the result they wanted while the Brexit referendum didn't) I believe in respecting the outcome of democracy even when I personally disagree with the result.

I have to say I think Scottish independence is a non-starter in reality, but if they really want it, then it's up to them to learn the hard way.

Dec 19, 2019 at 5:20 PM AK

Did they know they were voting to be independent of the EU, and independent of subsidies from the UK?

GC what are you talking about? No-one has yet voted for or against independence. What the SNP want is for the people of Scotland to be given a chance to hold a referendum upon Scottish independence.

I think BoJo has made it clear that demands made by the SNP are not high on his list to consider. Whether the SNP can do anything to change that, I have no idea.

Scotland has always been important to Labour because of the number of MPs sent to Westminster. Labour do not seem to have the money, will, or morale at the moment, to do anything about that.

BoJo has already revisited the newly rust converted Blue Wall in the North of England. Whether he launches a Scottish charm offensive before any local elections in Scotland remains to be seen, but he does enjoy confounding his critics.

The SNP are bust, very unpleasant court case coming up and once Brexit is a done deal the anti brexit but pro union voters they lied to will be lost. 45% of the vote gets nowhere in a referendum. Where is the successive 60% for Independence gone to.

SNP: 60% support needed before next independence referendum

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-60-support-needed-before-next-independence-referendum-1-3920508

Where is the Greens 1m signature petition

Greens accused of breaking manifesto pledge on second referendum

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15157831.greens-accused-of-breaking-manifesto-pledge-on-second-referendum/

Any chance of having a discussion of Scottish independence separate from a President Trump thread?

I am interested in both, but do not see any direct link.

Good point, JR.

2 points on USA/Trump:

- The USA is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic;

- The Obama administration used the intelligence agencies to spy upon a candidate for the republican nomination, and continued this effort after that candidate had become president.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/12/20/lisa-page-email-shows-direct-evidence-of-investigative-leaking-and-bias-ig-horowitz-said-he-could-not-find/

This may eventually become known to the US electorate:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/12/20/bad-news-for-coup-crew-former-nsa-director-mike-rogers-working-with-john-durham-for-several-months/

Hope this is on topic.

- The Obama administration used the intelligence agencies to spy upon a candidate for the republican nomination, and continued this effort after that candidate had become president.[...]

Dec 21, 2019 at 10:45 AM | Unregistered CommenterCharly

Thank you for getting us back on topic, Charly

The Clinton campaign, aided and abetted by the Obama administration, used National agencies such as the FBI to spy on election candidate(s). i.e. Trump, with a definite view to stopping his election. They did this using imaginary/concocted (take your pick) evidence presented to secret-courts. Courts presided over by Judges who were not properly informed about the gobsmackingly untrustworthy "evidence" placed before them. "Evidence" that broke the internal rules used by US security agencies to judge whether something should be taken seriously. "Evidence" financed at barely arms-length by the Democrat Party.

At each and every step, it seems there was a high level campaign to remove Trump from office, even before he was considered a potentially serious winner. I take the lack of retribution as simply a sign that he dare not. If he pushed too hard to drain the swamp he might find that 66% in the Senate was no longer an unreachable target for the impeachers. What the internal powers of the security agencies might do remains an ever-open threat. The ghost of J. Edgar Hoover still looms over all of us today.

Love him or loathe him (Trump), I think that is the real lesson that needs to be learned. Either way, I'm glad the rest of the US electorate aren't so easily duped as Clinton assumed.

Dec 21, 2019 at 8:07 PM michael hart

Pelosi and the Democrats have learned and improved on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
but it is still the same cr@p

Trump just needs to apply traditional justice through the Courts.

and Donald Trump is incoherent?

Nancy presser

and Donald Trump is incoherent?

Nancy presser

Dec 22, 2019 at 5:17 PM fred

Whoever designed the independent suspension system for her eyebrows, needs to reconfigure for the bumpy ride ahead.

Pelosi's Sat Nav has failed, she wanted to go straight on, but the brakes are jammed on, and there are no helpful indicators to confirm which way to turn. Something has caused someone to stall the Democrat juggernaut. If Pelosi knows why, she can't say, and if she doesn't know why, she can't admit it.

The Democrats will blame Global Warming and BREXIT, but is it simply that they risk doing a Corbyn and destroying their own credibility with every act, deed and word? Pelosi gets the blame and looks stupid, whilst Team Hillary and Team Sanders melt away

https://youtu.be/xYNsN-q_Lnk
https://youtu.be/ds6iur0EdxI

"the eyebrows are pretty odd - is that a facelift thing ?
Dec 24, 2019 at 12:34 AM | tomo"

The eyebrows appear to be the most stable part of Pelosi's appearance, but historical evidence might prove they have defied gravity and risen over the years.

I might well be reading wrong.... but apparently Nancy & Co won't pass their impeachment to The US Senate ... and now - their lawyers are apparently preparing a second impeachment action / vote based on the Mueller Report...

it's weird, really weird.

Dec 23, 2019 at 9:50 PM | Registered Commentertomo

As I heard it explained, the other play is the Democrat's demands to be allowed to go on a fishing expedition though personal/business information that Trump won't release... because he doesn't have to. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case....sometime around March.

It's possible they simply hope the issue will go away before then. The Senate can rule on the case as soon as they like, once they get the documents. They don't have to take any notice of what the Court says. If the documents don't appear, and the Senate does vote before the Supreme Court rules on the Democrat demands, then the Democrats will be able to claim that they were cheated out of the "damning evidence". At first sight, this might be the best political endgame the Democrats can get.

But maybe timing is everything. Perhaps they are hoping for the Supreme Court to rule that Trump must divulge information the Democrats can use to embarrass Trump. My personal reading of the commentaries I've read is that it is unlikely the Supreme court will give them what they want, and I also doubt that it will be embarrassing enough for their needs. The Senate will ignore it either way, meaning that the Democrats should take the window the Supreme court has given them and run with the story that they were "denied evidence".

The long and the short of it still remains how long they can make the process drag on and how much publicity they can wring from it, now that they have gone too far to turn back. Not many people seem to believe it will do the Democrats any good with voters who are not already solid Democrats. Senior Democrats only ever wanted it to be a publicity stunt where they didn't actually go as far as they have, but they have been dragged into it by their own supporters blood lust.

Nick Rekieta at Rekieta Law is likely to have good further legal updates on the matter. His live-streams are generally too long for most casual viewers to sift through, but he does make some shorter summaries. E.g. IMPEACHMENT In Just Twelve Minutes | Rekieta Law

A good summary of the Dems' three demands that are currently in litigation and how they are linked to their partisan attempt to expand the impeachment effort is here:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/12/22/house-judiciary-committee-court-deadline-tomorrow-dc-appellate-case-for-mueller-grand-jury-evidence/

When presented one last opportunity to do the right thing, the FBI instead pushed harder for their now-discredited hypothesis justifying the investigation. Peter Strzok had promised his lover, Lisa Page, he would “save” the country from Donald Trump. Given a choice between bringing the FBI back into the light of the Constitution or the darkness of blind hatred of Donald Trump, the conspirators choose darkness. It was at this precise moment that the FBI left behind any plausible deniability of “mistake” or “sloppiness.” From this point on, the FBI’s participation in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax became willful and intentional.

https://www.amgreatness.com/2019/12/22/the-fbis-darkest-hour/

Independent?

really?