Unbelievable Jeff

Imagine that - 40 ministers out, loss of any sort of majority, Corbyn into power, second referendum, stay.

The "Leave" vote also didn't have force in law... It won't matter if May is replaced by a Leaver, the vote that takes away "No deal" will mean that unless there is a single customs union, or a massive jump forwards technologically, Brexit will not be possible.

This is just in relation to the Tories though...

A shopping trolley doesn't post up random links from Brexit-supporting websites without understanding or explaining exactly what it means. Not quite as funny as your joke, admittedly. Equally pertinent though.

Are you this all over the place in your day to day life? Just wondering if it's normal, or if it's just Brexit that seems to have you not knowing if you're coming or going? By the way, you never answered the below: No, irrelevant to us. Maybe you can explain what the above means to us, if we stayed in the EU? Fancy having a go?

Legal risk unchanged - Geoffrey Cox. Good, good - hopefully pushes us further towards extension and second vote.

Where does that show us smashing it? Who are you comparing us to as there is no context, apart from the fact that we're certainly not smashing it compared to a couple of years ago.

As an aside, I think all torrent sites and illegal football streaming services should be banned - why shouldn't they be?

Lol, you see me as saying "Can you imagine..?" as a premature ejaculation?

You mean like the snoopers charter, that was put forward by our Government, and was then told it was too "snoopery", by the EU... Go figure.

Can you imagine..?

Where did I say it would get voted through "tomorrow"?

You've obviously looked into the trade deal more than me, so why don't you let me know where the issue is? I assume you supported the Snoopers Charter, did you? Article 13 at the moment is just protecting the copyright of people on the internet - not sure how that's particularly a bad thing.

And the bitter pill for the Brexiteers on this thread are twofold. First of all, they believed everything the hard brexiteers of the ERG told them they'd get in relation to a hard Brexit, and now, they're being made mugs of a second time as that same ERG will vote for a deal that is nowhere near a proper Brexit. Done like kippers. I really do pity them, as they've got to face their kids, and grandkids in years to come, and say that this is what they voted for.

What laws would you repeal? And what don't you agree with in the Japanese trade agreement? Without any substantiation, it's just parroted words.

Always comes back to rape with you. Why is that?

Good, glad you've backtracked on your mistakes earlier.

Sorry, what did you want? Rape? Murder? What EU laws would you repeal then? What about the Japanese trade agreement do you not support?

You been living under a ****ing rock mate? Nowt to do with being a "loony". https://www.markpack.org.uk/155076/brexit-campaigners-broke-law/ https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/17/vote-leave-broke-electoral-law-and-british-democracy-is-shaken https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44856992 https://news.sky.com/story/leave-campaign-and-arron-banks-firm-elson-insurance-fined-for-illegal-marketing-11624617 https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/high-court-found-that-vote-leave-broke-law-in-different-way/

I don't want to give traffic to websites that continue to perpetuate the crimes and frauds associated with the leave campaign. It just funds more liars. People post the **** from those sites on here, so don't worry I still get to read it.

I didn't read the article in the first place so be difficult to read it again - as I said before I don't want it on my internet history. From what I gather above, you are saying that they have come up with a security agreement which will be better than the terms we're in now - but unless they're in the Government how are they going to push that forward. So, are you saying that if we leave the EU with no deal, an idea from some random ex-peeps on a Brexiteer website will be implemented, and that idea will propose a better security arrangement than we have currently. Is that what you're saying? Oh, and by the way, here is another ex head of MI6 saying the exact opposite - so who to believe eh? https://news.sky.com/story/national-security-will-be-severely-weakened-in-no-deal-brexit-former-security-chiefs-11616825

Why are you starting with the insults already? Amazing how you Brexiteers seem to have such short fuses.

But you're not criticising the EU, aren't you criticising the Withdrawal Agreement? Is not staying in the EU better for our security than both the Withdrawal Agreement and No Deal Brexit. You seem to be getting confused what you're arguing for and against here...

Just as an aside as I'm not sure whether it says in the article - staying in the EU is better than both the withdrawal agreement or no deal options.