Why does it?If the trade agreement meant the UK remaining in the single market and customs union and agreeing to retain EU standards, you'd have a point. But the government has repeatedly said they would go against its red flags.
Come on, he only speaks the truth. If you disagree with him you're simply wrong.
Most scandals have to be uncovered. But those at the top of the EU are so brazen that they do it in full sight of everyone and then tell them so what. Just like you say to us.What are you on about? There are scandals in every organisation in the world. I would be surprised if there weren’t any in the EU. But you think that only the EU has scandals. You are, at best naive.
Why does it?
A free trade agreement would cover most problems. The rest could be negotiated.
They say that freedom of movement is very important. So is staying in the SM. Add a bit more and we are fully in the EU without any say.
You said it didn't happen because Juncker said it didn't happen. I said I can prove it as it is on YouTube where he says it and can prove you wrong. So now you try twisting the truth.You posted it... I asked you why?
So you twisting the truth makes it all OK?You are mad. How can you prove me wrong if I agreed with you? And it wasn’t illegal... unless you can prove otherwise... which you admit is not possible
Most scandals have to be uncovered. But those at the top of the EU are so brazen that they do it in full sight of everyone and then tell them so what. Just like you say to us.
So you twisting the truth makes it all OK?
Yet again I will remind you. There are no laws on how those at the top of the EU run it. No laws means no laws to break.
But there are ruless and regulations. And they broke them all.
Yet you try and make out it is OK as there were no laws to break.
You said it didn't happen because Juncker said it didn't happen. I said I can prove it as it is on YouTube where he says it and can prove you wrong. So now you try twisting the truth.
How unusual.
More lies by Mart. What a surprise.Exactly. He has the thread back on Selmayr because he doesn’t want to end up at the dodgy referendum, which affects the UK far more than Selmayr. He is deathly silent on the possiblity of a Müller style investigation. Tom Watson has also pointed out the silence on the referendum when we are up in arms about Russian meddling in other things. Why? Why don’t people like Astute want to go down there? Still back to going round in circles about Selmayr, Juncker and fish....
Saying I don't trust them because they are bent is saying what?Exactly. We have everything we want now, but we are leaving to suit people like yourself. That entails, according to May, leaving the SM, CU and, necessarily, losing our existing free trade deal. It is not rocket science and blaming it on Selmayr, Juncker and the EU is stupid.
So you twisting the truth makes it all OK?
Yet again I will remind you. There are no laws on how those at the top of the EU run it. No laws means no laws to break.
But there are ruless and regulations. And they broke them all.
Yet you try and make out it is OK as there were no laws to break.
You said Juncker denied it. I called him a liar for denying it.I asked you why you posted that Juncker denied it?
Saying I don't trust them because they are bent is saying what?
You making up excuses for them is you saying what?
Name a rule or regulation on the part of Selmayr getting the position that wasn't broke.4 points of maladministration were identified by the ombudsman. Not „all rules were broken“. Stick to the truth for once in your life. Referendum?
Ah. So Selmayr getting control of the EU is now peanuts.You ignore the big UK scandal and divert to what, in comparison, is peanuts. What excuses!
You said Juncker denied it. I called him a liar for denying it.
Can you see the difference?
Ah. So Selmayr getting control of the EU is now peanuts.
Why does it?
A free trade agreement would cover most problems. The rest could be negotiated.
They say that freedom of movement is very important. So is staying in the SM. Add a bit more and we are fully in the EU without any say.
Name a rule or regulation on the part of Selmayr getting the position that wasn't broke.
The UK could sign-up to parity in terms of regulations without having freedom of movement but then the USA is going to be too keen on doing a trade deal then.
Most scandals are learned from so the same mistakes can be avoided in the future.Most scandals have to be uncovered. But those at the top of the EU are so brazen that they do it in full sight of everyone and then tell them so what. Just like you say to us.
Most scandals are learned from so the same mistakes can be avoided in the future.
Some organisations want it to be embedded in their culture & massage rules (without all that legal nonesense)...helps to edge closer to the overall goal EUSSG where democracy rules (Soviet style)
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
If you know the answer to the problem, then send it to May, BoJo and RM. back to pre GFA borders and we can get on with the FTA. You’re wasted on here.
I hate politicians too.No. I have a problem with liars and people who twist the truth to try and make a point.
Again you’ve missed my point. The return of a border as pre 98 has nothing to do with the Belfast agreement. If it happens then Northern Ireland can excercise it’s right to have a referendum to leave the uk if it so desires.
So you can't name the rules and regulations not broke when Juncker put Selmayr in his position.Not up to me. You said they are all broken. I am aware of cases of maladministration. You claim all rules are broken. Name them.
Oh yes your normal line.Yes, and then they, Brexiters, come out with the vassal state argument. Basically they are finding it hard to take in, that whatever they do, it will be a worse deal than what we have now.
This was a few days ago but had been going on for ages."In haste to go Dutch, Unilever miscalculated concerns in Brexit-bound UK" - In haste to go Dutch, Unilever miscalculated concerns in Brexit-bound UK | Reuters
Maybe some are coming to different conclusions when they look at the detail of abandoning the UK
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Of course they are. Can you think of a reason why they would risk having to pull out of the UK if the EU made it too difficult for them?"Citi plans new UK bank as part of Brexit reorganisation" - Citi plans new UK bank as part of Brexit reorganisation | Reuters
And some are seeing opportunities or seeking to ptotect their business here
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?