5. The principles of masterly inactivity and executive action

1. Sovereignty in this country
2. Legal reasons we can leave right now
3. The principle of prerogative
4. The situation in France
5. Masterly inactivity and executive action
6. It’s all about culture, not race

We’ve looked at an old post about France, here’s one now on Italy and the EU using exactly the same playbook – claiming jurisdiction over Italy – their situation is different in the sense of their legal system, not in terms of the EU actions:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/hungary-asylum-seekers-illegal-eu-court-law-a9021176.html

Meanwhile, back in this country:

JRM is in place precisely to explain one of those legal positions, resulting in Brexit. End of. That’s it.

At the time of that post, there were legal arguments and counter-arguments, you will recall, between learned judges leaning EU and others leaning UK. The further they leaned on ‘archaic’ provisions, the more tenuous it became and the further the other side leaned on no parliament binding any subsequent parliament – ditto.

If it went to court, which Remain hopes, tied up for years, then the question is – which court? A UK or a European court? It comes down, of course, to whoever the final arbiter is.

Looking across the pond, this is why the Donald is stacking SCOTUS and other courts, e.g. 9th Circuit. The whole game is to legally enable political will to triumph. The traditional opponents of this, the radicals, us, are muted in this case because the outcome the radicals want, e.g. Brexit, can only be achieved by executive action, not by parliamentary vote.

This is how the whole thing has been set up since the time of Major and across the pond too.

Which comes down inevitably to patronage – to whom was May beholden? Same with Osborne, Hammond.  Who enables them to retain their posts? Once those posts are untenable, so are they.

That link above pertains to the two year Article 50 period and that is now over. It was over earlier this year. There is no court which can hear a dispute between an EU favoured court and any supreme UK court – there’s no uber-court with that sort of jurisdiction, only the ludicrous, opposed pronouncements by one side or the other with the utmost gravitas.

Five years from now, some sort of half result emerges, a trillion pounds to fatcats later.

The only way this Gordian knot can be cut in 2019, as said, is masterly inactivity – never bring it to a vote, never take it to a court, ride maverick through the flak.

There’s good reason – the UK courts are anti-Brexit. No court will uphold UK sovereignty, except in terms of parliamentary sovereignty, not the sovereignty of the people.

So, what we’re trying to do, via Boris, is that a well-advised maverick is attempting to create new precedent [executive action, part two] in the guise of restoring old legalities – hence JRM’s crucial role in cabinet [he sits in].

Here’s a specific – medical supplies:

Brexit botch: Johnson forced to save May’s no deal blunder as insiders reveal huge error

Big Pharma certainly wants the drugs conduit to continue – I and millions like me are on Big Pharma drugs, heart in my case. There was an article today that all men over 50 should be on blood pressure drugs – easy to see where that’s going. People will vote according to where this blackmail leads them, not to Brexit niceties.

Scenario – Boris goes to the people, Remain say your heart drugs continue uninterrupted, heavily discounted, if you vote for a Remain party. If you vote for a pro-Brexit outfit, the drugs are cut off.

Again – only executive action and masterly inactivity will cut through all this, on the grounds that there are equal and opposite legalities vying against each other, costing billions and much time. A treacle trap.

Success requires a slightly mad, egotistical, very rude, articulate, canny, funny maverick, quietly listening to legal advice on the side, avoiding elephant traps.

That will win through I believe but what about post-Brexit? There is now a monster who can’t legally be stopped. And one of his already stated policies is open borders, disguised as ‘amnesty for illegals’.

The Blocked Dwarf saw this long ago – he was far more anti-Brexit than pro-EU, but he had no answer to how the invasion would be stopped, he always disappeared or went quiet on that part.

And where is Nigel post-Brexit?  He has his Brexit but he’s not interested in stopping the invasion. Anne-Marie wants to stop the invasion but is nobbled by rainbow politics half the people utterly reject.

TR is TR, he will have a certain amount of support, that’s it. Gerard Batten? Lack of support within UKIP, now an empty shell no one will vote for.

Question – where is our slightly mad, egotistical, very rude, articulate, canny, funny maverick, quietly listening to legal advice on the side, avoiding elephant traps, who is championing stopping the Kalergi invasion?

This continues in part two at 16:00 today.