EU Can't Trump His Wisdom


Legal advice from a recipient who has been sued over 3,500 times should never be sniffed at or eye-rolled. Why Donald Trump’s view that the UK should terminate negotiations with the EU and embark on an intrinsic judiciary marathon against the EU, triggers a get-out-clause for the self-inflicted Brexit chaos that’s taken over Westminster.  Every MP has overlooked one vital detail…. Every court in a democracy provides outcomes.
Right from the Brexit get-go, in late June 2016, I gathered there would be a group of external, independent technocrats tweaking an EU / UK deal on behalf of the UK administration; to firstly create a coherent platform for the EU and the UK to comply with and secondly, allow both parties to negotiate effectively, to finalise / battle out in the interest of all concerned. Thirdly, I expected the rules and terms to be in sync with triggering Article 50. The White Paper published in July 2018 verifies none of this happened – therefore enabling Tory politics to deepen the national divide. We’ve just computed political posturing is a time consuming practice and has no right to be on centre stage, leaving the UK with a potential cliff. Technocrats easily would’ve alleviated this occurrence; regretfully due to the internal disorders, resignations and the far right tour de forces ---- the clouds are darkening and the prowling lupus is restless.  Lifejackets are obsolete in woods; maybe a makeshift hut will be suffice or better still a deflection tactic… for example: suing the EU? By changing the decrepit political platform; you’ll denote the markets won’t rain on our parade singularly and make the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nigel Farage a currency windfall overnight - meh, outcomes dear boy, outcomes.
Legal action habitually evaluates areas of interest, what initiated the concept of having EU Referendum; this goes back to David Cameron’s discussions for a new national deal with the EU. You may recall the EU weren’t able to budge on their philosophy of an ‘ever closer union’ – the parliament was also making waves that greater integration equated the European States to be less flexible;  legal sources also announced it’ll be irreversible too; even for those who’re  Pro-EU, the formality and language was disjointed. I’ll concur this was a divisive approach for a non-sovereign political experiment to undertake on sovereign States collectively; the formal style of the EU, by not enabling national parliaments the power to veto EU legislation is a pathway to potential legal action; it ultimately gave the UK no choice but to reconsider their EU relationship.
Another area of interest is the peculiar set-up of the Lisbon Treaty in 1998; in euphuistic terms the Treaty authorship is beyond myopic --- and bureaucrats have admitted malpractice, by failing to bind Article 50 under ECJ judiciary. Meaning that March 29th 2019 doesn’t have to be the day the UK formally leaves the EU; delays are normal procedure, the EU doesn’t work to a determined schedule and the Lisbon Treaty personifies this attitude. The most infamous episode was in April 2008, when the then PM Gordon Brown formally signed a belated EU Treaty; the event was staged for a plethora of media streams; typical of recent Treaties and to call it shambolic is accurate. The UK is better placed than the other twenty-seven States to question the details of Lisbon. Former diplomat Lord Kerr implied that additional conditions to Article 50 was possible – namely on UK’s Withdrawal Bill.  At present a fixed EU departure time of 11pm GMT on 29th March 2019 has been confirmed – as the terms aren’t binding this schedule is invalid. Indirectly, any future ratification referencing the Withdrawal Bill / Treaty can only be truly agreed on completion of Brexit negotiations, the Bill expires on January 21st 2019.
What is unknown is what form does Brexit take from January 22nd 2019? I can hasten a guess a continued compromised has to be made by the Brexit Team and EU negotiators of the pretext everything what we’ve known up to that point was derived by comprehending a democratic status – equating that all options are still on the negotiating table including staying in the European Union, (if a no-deal became a reality) if ‘all options’ don’t apply or become ‘non-negotiable’ then the UK wouldn’t be deemed a democracy – dangerous games, that’ll trigger the UK suing the EU via going through the ECJ – granted,  if this in situ commences, the UK’s EU departure date will become irrelevant. By February 1st 2019, we’ll know the answer to these scenarios; albeit, also expect litigations against the EU to enforce fiscal passports for the EU trading bloc, devised to keep our financial service sector solvent.  
Positions change rapidly in arbitration for the White Paper is a far cry from what was promised to the nation voting for independence.  Instead the UK is to be a vassallus for the EU – from the outset, internally independent, however a servant and held an allegiance to a sixteenth century monarch (EU); putting this into contrast the EU isn’t of a higher sovereign standing than the UK and an EU expropriation to these shores isn’t imminent. May’s convoluted vision of a vassallus nation sings; ‘save me’ and Trump amiably offered simplistic legal advice, plainly used as a deflective tactic to exact a… outcome; something Theresa May is incapable of pioneering herself. There’s a realization how despicable May is as a leader and a Prime Minster because one five minute conversation with a misogynist, third-rate President has offered May a lifeline in EU negotiations – subsequently guaranteeing options. Regretfully there’s a worrisome UK Post-Brexit model forming, directly indicated by being a so-called ‘vassell state’ by obliging to pay remunerations to its superior and at a drop of a hat complying to their future whims, i.e. Federal European Army – effectively the UK will be taking orders from Brussels to aid the EU27 with military units; not very Churchillian is it? No wonder Boris Johnson bolted from his cabinet tenureship.   
Adverse economic impacts should be gauged till October, purely in a bid to sue the EU. Trade outages while the UK is in the EU is apparent and possible downgraded of future investments can bolster a claim just as a private corporation can sue their competitors for unfair trading -- another blatant observation would be the Japan / EU trade deal that’s come into fruition, commenced at an epoch when Brexit tilts off towards a ‘no-deal’ prediction. Thanks to Trump I can see the European Central Bank bailing out ‘ol Blighty, ordered by the ECJ on humanity grounds -- notably, our special relationship statuses are going to be insanely tested.

Comments