The Protocol was provably leveraged by opportunistic terrorist threats, threats that would not have been made had May won a secure majority in 2017. The Protocol crisis is therefore, principally, a *moral* question, not a trade, customs, sovereignty or constitutional question
Can the allegation of 'opportunism' be proven? If so, what action should be taken against lead Ultra Remainers found guily of using terrorist threats against the negotiating position of UKG, and in a 2nd Referendum 'People's Vote' directly against voters, ie the People, to terrorize them into voting Remain?
The Protocol was provably leveraged by opportunistic terrorist threats, threats that would not have been made had May won a secure majority in 2017. The Protocol crisis is therefore, principally, a *moral* question, not a trade, customs, sovereignty or constitutional question
Can the allegation of 'opportunism' be proven? If so, what action should be taken against lead Ultra Remainers found guily of using terrorist threats against the negotiating position of UKG, and in a 2nd Referendum 'People's Vote' directly against voters, ie the People, to terrorize them into voting Remain?
Look forward to your thoughts, Sam.