BREXIT leader Boris Johnson will NOT stand for UK Prime Minister

[Surya Gayatri]

Source: MSNBC (cable)

Brexit firebrand and RW leader Boris Johnson has announced that he will not be seeking the premiership of Great Britain. This leaves the government in turmoil, as the current Prime Minister, David Cameron, has already announced his plans to step down in September.

No links--will post as available.

Read more: MSNBC http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36672591

---

As the pundits on MSNBC said, this only goes to show that the BREXIT Band of Breakers just wanted to burn everything down and had NO plan of what to do afterwards.

Stay tuned.

[geek tragedy]

1. Being the PM of the UK about as desirable as a speaking gig at the RNC.

Maybe we can lend Chris Christie and Ben Carson to them.

[Surya Gayatri]

12. Well, that brilliant mind, Michael GOVE, has stepped into the breach.

He'd be more than pleased to take the helm.

[geek tragedy]

13. I think Gove helped push Boris aside nt

[Surya Gayatri]

14. Damn, Prime Minister friggin' GOVE--the mind boggles...

Boris is nothing but a huge bloviating mouth. Craven, gutless, lily-livered git.

[TubbersUK]

16. Gave him cover for his cowardly retreat I would say n/t

[iandhr]

39. So matter what they have done...

... I think that is to harsh a punishment

[brooklynite]

2. UPDATE: Boris Johnson's statement

The Guardian:

That is the agenda for the next prime minister of this country.

Well, I must tell you, my friends, you who have waited faithfully for the punchline of this speech, that having consulted colleagues and in view of the circumstances in parliament, I have concluded that person cannot be me.

My role will be to give every possible support to the next Conservative administration to make sure that we properly fulfil the mandate of the people that was delivered at the referendum and to champion the agenda that I believe in, to stick up for the forgotten people of this country.

And, if we do so, if we invest in our children and improve their life chances, if we continue to fuel the engines of social mobility, if we build on the great reforming legacy of David Cameron, if we invest in our infrastructure and we follow a sensible, one nation Conservative approach that is simultaneously tax-cutting and pro-enterprise, then I believe that this country can win and be better and more wonderful and, yes, greater than ever before.

[geek tragedy]

4. Translation: I don't want to be the one holding the bag.

Takes quite a pol to run away from the consequences of his own life's mission.

[Surya Gayatri]

7. Craven, abject--running away from the carnage he's helped to cause.

Boris the Big Mouth Bloviator will live in infamy.

[BeyondGeography]

23. Sounds like the support wasn't there

Nor the desire.

[geek tragedy]

3. BBC link:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36672591

[Surya Gayatri]

5. Thanks. Will edit to include this.

[LeftishBrit]

6. Whaaaatttttt

this is getting crazier and crazier.


Not that I wanted him to be, but talk about the rat leaving the sinking ship, after helping to sink it himself!!!!

ETA, does this mean Michael fucking Gove might get to be PM!!!!!!

This is all like a bad dream....

[Surya Gayatri]

10. But, you may have god-awful Prime Minister GOVE to look forward to.

Jeezus H. Christ, what a total, monumental mess. A right royal British balls up.

[LeftishBrit]

18. If someone had tried to produce a political satire with all this in it...

it would have been rejected as too incredible and over-the-top.

[Surya Gayatri]

19. Exactly. Nobody could make this shit up. CALLING MONTY PYTHON--your relentless wit

is required to heal the nation.

[TubbersUK]

8. And Boris runs for the hills n/t

[Surya Gayatri]

17. I hope the British people rise up to stone him while he's on his way out. (figuratively)

Nobody deserves a ravening mob with pitchforks and torches more than Boris the Boor.

[tavernier]

9. Why would he want to ride a broken bike?

Especially since he has no idea how to fix it?

Perhaps Cameron won't have the choice to resign, as no one will have the job.

Shades of John Boehner?

[Surya Gayatri]

11. Or, speaking slots at the RNC Convention?

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. For a bit of background, a couple of UK group threads

Michael Gove's wife exposes doubts about Boris Johnson with email blunder
(and a Guardian analysis of that as House of Cards or Macbeth)

Michael Gove announces surprise bid for Tory leadership - Brexit live

Gove's wife, Sarah Vine, is a columnist who used to work for Murdoch at The Times, and now for Dacre at the Mail. So her comment that neither of those two supported Boris could be significant.

A Guardian article from 4 years ago on Gove: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/oct/05/michael-gove-next-tory-leader

Then I read every word published under his Times byline up to his election in 2005, and found that Gove the progressive arch-moderniser simply does not fit with the facts. If you want to understand what Tory modernisation really adds up to, it's a highly instructive read.

Gove's neo-con hawkishness in foreign policy has always been well known. He called for the invasion of Iraq just two days after 9/11, and before the planes hit the towers he'd already published a column that morning calling for action against Saddam Hussein. A committed Zionist and slavish admirer of George W Bush, a passionate Eurosceptic and staunch defender of British Gibraltar, he regards the Northern Ireland peace process as a shameful capitulation to terrorists, and once wrote a column calling for "a revival of jingoism". But where is the evidence in his writing of domestic social liberalism? It doesn't exist.

Passionately pro marriage, he opposes statutory paternity pay, stem cell research, euthanasia and contraception for school children, but supports privatisation of both the BBC and the NHS, and proposes the marketisation of immigration policy, whereby a British passport could, he suggests, be sold for £10,000. He is far ruder about the Lib Dems than New Labour, despairs of the "absurd belief" that the armed forces ought to reflect the country they serve by recruiting more women and gay men, and takes a robustly bang-em-up approach to law and order. As for supporting public services, Gove can see only one acceptable line: "The Conservatives could defend public servants from the unjust, unproven and demoralising charge of 'institutional racism'," the Macpherson report being, in his view, an outrage.

Why, then, do so many colleagues and political opponents see Gove in this rosier, more moderate light? It has to be because of his debater's gift for according courteous respect to opposing views, creating the impression that he's taken them on board, when he hasn't actually revised his position at all. Everyone tells me how carefully Gove listens, but when asked to recall a single occasion when he has been persuaded to change his mind, to their surprise no one can come up with one. It is a case of manners maketh the impression of a moderniser, for Gove's Tories don't need to be "inclusive", or "tolerant". The important thing is to look as if they are.

[Surya Gayatri]

21. Wow, just wow...that Guardian profile is totally devastating.

"...he regards the Northern Ireland peace process as a shameful capitulation to terrorists, and once wrote a column calling for "a revival of jingoism".

[malthaussen]

40. So, if Johnson roughly equates to Trump...

... does Cove roughly equate to Cruz? Except that it doesn't appear Cove uses rabid religious fundamentalism to cloak his ambition.

-- Mal

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. I don't think it would be close enough. Gove had been working apparently closely with Johnson

on the Brexit leave campaign (they were the 2 leading Tories in it), to the extent people were calling Gove Johnson's 'campaign manager' for the leadership election.

Johnson really isn't a good enough equivalent for Trump, though - he's not a real outsider (Tory MP from 2001-08, then Tory Mayor of London, now an MP again; and a journalist for the staunchly Tory Telegraph since about 1990). He clowns around, and can say causal offensive things, but he's also self-deprecating in a way Trump could never be, and is literate (when he writes a biography, he really has written it himself). I wonder if Newt Gingrich might be a better analogy for Johnson.

[Odin2005]

20. ROFLMAO!!!

[AntiBank]

22. I think Theresa May will be the next Tory leader and she may really delay Article 50 for a long time

2017 at the earliest (she was Remain).


Theresa May rules out early general election or second EU referendum if she becomes Conservative leader

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-rules-our-early-general-election-or-second-eu-referendum-if-she-becomes-conservative-a7110656.html


Theresa May has officially launched her campaign for Conservative party leader, ruling out calling an early general election or second EU referendum.

The Home Secretary also said the EU's article 50 provision to formally start the Brexit process should not be invoked until next year at the earliest.

She argued that the country needed "strong leadership and a clear sense of direction" in the coming years.

"I want to use this opportunity to make several things clear. First, Brexit means Brexit … the public gave their verdict. There must be no attempts to remain inside the EU, no attempts to rejoin it through the backdoor, and no second referendum," she said at a press conference.

"Second, there should be no general election until 2020. There should be a normal autumn statement held in the normal way, at the normal time, and no emergency budget.

"And there should be no decision to invoke article 50 before the British negotiating strategy is agreed and clear, which means article 50 should not be invoked until the end of this year."

She also added that she would not push for Britain to leave the European Convention on Human Rights, a policy she previously flirted with.

On freedom of movement, the Home Secretary said that voters had sent a clear message that they wanted restrictions on immigration.

She however said she would like Britain to remain in the single market if it restricted freedom of movement.

All countries with full access to the European single market currently have freedom of movement with the EU as a whole. EU officials have in recent days signaled that this is unlikely to change.


snip

[Surya Gayatri]

24. Do you seriously believe that the EU is going to allow this divorce to drag on for years? Read "NO".

They will soon force Britain's hand. Every day, every week, every month that this destructive process is allowed to fester means further damage to all of the EU institutions.

They will protect themselves from this British mad-cow disease.

Remain, schemain, the British people have voted and the EU will demand implementation at the earliest, Theresa May nothwithstanding.

[AntiBank]

32. a lot of UK constitutional law opinion's starting to coalesce around the proposition that Parliament

has to approve it first.

Ewan Smith: What Would Happen if the Government Unlawfully Issued an Article 50 Notification without Parliamentary Approval?

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/06/30/ewan-smith-what-would-happen-if-the-government-unlawfully-issued-an-article-50-notification-without-parliamentary-approval/

In “Pulling the Article 50 ‘Trigger’: Parliament’s Indispensable Role” Nick Barber, Jeff King and Tom Hickman argued that it is Parliament, and not the government, who get to decide whether to trigger an notification under Article 50 of the Treaty of the European Union. I agree with them.

Barber, King and Hickman base the argument on general grounds, drawing on the Case of Proclamations. However, it is important to consider the specialised rules that apply to the government’s power to conclude treaties. It is also important to think about the consequences of unconstitutional action, both as a matter of domestic and international law. It is not obvious that a British court could prevent the government from issuing a notification, nor is it obvious that an unconstitutional notification would be ineffective in international law. This post will explain these complications; then explain why an English court can issue a declaration to prevent the government from making a notification without Parliamentary approval; and why such a declaration would void a purported notification under Article 50.

As Barber, King, and Hickman argue, the government cannot change the law by the prerogative. This means the government cannot change the law by treaty. As Lord Herschell put it in Walker v. Baird “[t]he Crown, by treaty with a foreign power [cannot] acquire new rights against its subjects.” However, the power to conclude treaties is subject to rules that do not apply to all prerogative powers. Before CCSU v. Minister for the Civil Service, we might have said that the power to conclude treaties was not justiciable. The courts remain particularly slow to interfere with the exercise of foreign affairs powers. Lord Denning explained this rule in Blackburn v. Attorney General:

“The treaty-making power of this country rests not in the courts, but in the Crown; that is, Her Majesty acting upon the advice of her Ministers. When her Ministers negotiate and sign a treaty, even a treaty of such paramount importance as [the EEC Treaty], they … exercise the prerogative of the Crown. Their action in so doing cannot be challenged or questioned in these courts.”

This rule can be traced back to Blad’s Case, decided about half a century after the Case of Proclamations. It finds recent expression in cases that will be familiar to the Leave campaign. In cases like Blackburn, R (Smedley) v. HM Treasury and R (Rees Mogg) v. Foreign Secretary, opponents of closer relations with the European Union challenged the government’s ratification of EU treaties, using arguments which superficially appear to be similar to Barber, King and Hickman’s.


snip


Nick Barber, Tom Hickman and Jeff King: Pulling the Article 50 ‘Trigger’: Parliament’s Indispensable Role

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/06/27/nick-barber-tom-hickman-and-jeff-king-pulling-the-article-50-trigger-parliaments-indispensable-role/

In this post we argue that as a matter of domestic constitutional law, the Prime Minister is unable to issue a declaration under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty – triggering our withdrawal from the European Union – without having been first authorised to do so by an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament. Were he to attempt to do so before such a statute was passed, the declaration would be legally ineffective as a matter of domestic law and it would also fail to comply with the requirements of Article 50 itself.

There are a number of overlapping reasons for this. They range from the general to the specific. At the most general, our democracy is a parliamentary democracy, and it is Parliament, not the Government, that has the final say about the implications of the referendum, the timing of an Article 50 our membership of the Union, and the rights of British citizens that flow from that membership. More specifically, the terms and the object and purpose of the European Communities Act 1972 also support the correctness of the legal position set out above.

The reason why this is so important is not only because Article 50, once triggered, will inevitably fundamentally change our constitutional arrangements, but also because the timing of the issue of any Article 50 declaration has major implications for our bargaining position with other European States, as we will explain.

snip


(ii) The Domestic Constitutional Requirements For an Article 50 Declaration

In his resignation speech, David Cameron said:

“A negotiation with the European Union will need to begin under a new Prime Minister, and I think it is right that this new Prime Minister takes the decision about when to trigger Article 50 and start the formal and legal process of leaving the EU.”

The Prime Minster did not specify the legal authority under which he believed he or his successors might invoke Article 50, but the typical answer will be obvious to constitutional lawyers: it is the royal prerogative, a collection of executive powers held by the Crown since medieval times, that exist unsupported by statute. The Prerogative is widely used in foreign affairs, which Parliament has largely left in the hands of the Government. The treaty-making prerogative of the Crown is one such area.

If the Prime Minister is correct, and the Prerogative is the basis for the declaration, he enjoys complete discretion about when to issue the declaration: the trigger could be pulled in October, next year, or in ten years’ time.

The relationship between statute and the prerogative has long been contentious, and up until quite recently – the 1980s – it was arguable that the exercise of prerogative powers (though not their existence) was beyond the capacity of the court to review; the King could do no wrong. Whilst the courts might not have been able to review its exercise, they certainly could and did rule on whether the prerogative contended for by the Crown existed in the first place. One of the earliest limits on the prerogative was that it could not be used to undermine statutes; where the two are in tension, statute beats prerogative. In one of the seminal cases of the common law, The Case of Proclamations, (1610) 12 Co. Rep. 74 Sir Edward Coke declared:

“..the King by his proclamation… cannot change any part of the common law, or statute law, or the customs of the realm…”


snip



Brexit Won’t Happen? Why Article 50 Could Mean UK Remains In The European Union

http://www.ibtimes.com/brexit-wont-happen-why-article-50-could-mean-uk-remains-european-union-2388192


snip

Here are four reasons why Britain might avoid a Brexit.

1. There is no majority in Parliament for Brexit, nor was the referendum legally binding. These facts were obvious before the referendum; now they are essential. Disengaging from the EU will require legislation, most notably a law repealing the laws that Britain passed when it originally joined the EU.

The House of Commons is perhaps three-quarters pro-EU. Anyone who argues that the referendum binds members in a political sense is asking those who oppose Brexit to either vote against their conscience or resign. How likely are either of those outcomes? Consider: There are signs, like a poll released this week, that over 1 million Britons already regret voting to leave the EU. And if members of Parliament are asked to vote on legislation abandoning the EU, they will do it against the backdrop of the near-certainty that they are breaking up the United Kingdom, since Scotland is likely to seek independence.


2. Only Parliament can trigger Article 50. There’s no precedent for this situation, but start with the basics: Parliament is sovereign in the United Kingdom, and membership in the EU has conferred all sorts of rights (human rights, defensible through European institutions) and privileges (payments to British farmers under the Common Agricultural Policy) on British subjects. If Article 50 is invoked, Britain is out in two years, whether or not it negotiates a replacement relationship with the rest of the EU, and those rights disappear.

A group of British attorneys affiliated with the UK Constitutional Law Association have made the case that no government can set that process in motion. “Brexit is the most important decision that has faced the United Kingdom in a generation and it has massive constitutional and economic ramifications,” they wrote in their brief. “In our constitution, Parliament gets to make this decision, not the Prime Minister.” At the very least, this issue will be fought out in court.

3. Brexiteers don’t have a viable negotiating stance. Wanting to leave the EU isn’t enough; advocates need a positive agenda for what kind of relationship they do want afterward, but it involves squaring a circle. Nigel Farage and other members of the U.K. Independence Party ran a campaign against immigration to Britain while simultaneously urging continued membership in the European Single Market. Well, the Single Market includes freedom of movement, as other European leaders are now helpfully pointing out, and they are going to insist on it if Britain wants the Single Market.

Cecilia Malmstrom, the EU’s trade commissioner, put it pretty clearly today: “Out is out. They can’t be half in.” In other words, British Brexit proponents now face the daunting task of negotiating with an angry EU while keeping the open-to-commerce-but-closed-to-migrants promises they made during the campaign. If they fail, they anger their own domestic constituencies. Do they have the guts to even try?

4. The public will feel the British economy contract. The only debate about the impact of the vote on Britain’s economy is how bad it will be. Unemployment is expected to rise, and that will affect public opinion and produce more regretful “leave” voters. Almost three-quarters of the respondents to a Bloomberg News survey of economists predicted Britain will slip into a recession, with the only divide between them being whether it will be this year or 2017. Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, warned that a vote for Brexit would tip the country into recession.

Only a Parliament that favors EU membership can trigger the start of the Brexit negotiating process. The opponents of EU membership don’t even have a coherent position. And the economic fallout will sour the public mood with every passing day.

A recipe for Brexit? Not so fast.



snip

[Surya Gayatri]

34. The next few months promise to be very tumultuous in the UK.

Uncharted legal waters will have to be navigated with god knows what captain at the helm.

Look out for undercurrents and coastal hazards.

[truebluegreen]

33. The Irish voted twice to leave,

but somehow it didn't happen. I'm not sure it will happen this time either; I don't think the Brexiters even wanted this, I think they wanted a wedge issue to exploit and instead it blew up in their faces.

I doubt if any of them wants to be PM and be the guy who has to confess that he/they can't deliver what they promised. Boris the Boor is bailing out now to try to salvage his future in politics. As little regard as I have for Cameron, his resignation did deposit this flaming turd in the laps of those who deserve it most.

[Surya Gayatri]

35. ^^^This!^^^ "flaming turd"...in the political punch bowl.

[OnDoutside]

46. Not quite true, the Irish had to vote twice on the Nice Treaty. I agree though, I have my doubts

that this will actually happen too. If Theresa May wins, then it's game on.

[Native]

51. the BBC article says she "is favourite to win the contest and become prime minister."

[LittleGirl]

25. I never imagined such a cockup

my British spouse is just reeling from this past week!

[Surya Gayatri]

27. Sad spectacle to see a proud nation reduced to such buffoonery.

[LittleGirl]

29. Honestly, it's been eye opening

When makes me think, oh no, Trump COULD win. ugh.

[Surya Gayatri]

30. When mass stupidity gains the ascendancy, anything can happen.

[FSogol]

26. LOL, like the GOP, he's better at complaining and ruining things....

[Skinner]

28. What a coward and a fraud.

Looks like this person got it right: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027957387

[Surya Gayatri]

31. Yup, the Telegraph called it alright:

"If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership."

What they neglected to say, though, is just what a craven, gutless and lily-livered git Boris really is.

[sufrommich]

36. Britain needs a "you break it,you buy it" rule.

The cowards yelled "burn it down" and are now running from the fire. Despicable.

[Surya Gayatri]

41. Back in the day, this brand of treason would have been cause for drawing,

hanging and quartering. Oh, for the good old days!




Drawing and quartering,
William Wallace: death [Credit: The Print Collector/Heritage-Images]
part of the grisly penalty anciently ordained in England (1283) for the crime of treason. Until 1867, when it was abolished, the full punishment for a traitor could include several steps. First he was drawn, that is, tied to a horse and dragged to the gallows. A so-called hurdle, or sledge, is sometimes mentioned in this context. Although such a device may have been a means of mercy, The History of English Law Before the Time of Edward I (2nd ed., 1898; reissued 1996) states that it was more likely a way to deliver a live body to the hangman.

[onehandle]

37. Tool. nt

[malthaussen]

38. Well, that is good news...

... for a given value of "good." The "poison chalice" theory expounded when Cameron resigned gains legs from this.

Interesting times.

-- Mal

[yellowcanine]

42. It appears Boris Johnson has trolled the British people.

Way to go Boris!

[TubbersUK]

43. Tory grandee Heseltine has weighed in:

during a piece on Radio 5 Live from the The Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) conference, and it's brutal:

https://twitter.com/sophieevebarnes/status/748519344724901888

[Surya Gayatri]

44. Just devastating...

"He's like a general who marches his army to the sound of the guns and the moment he sees the battleground, he abandons it."..."But the pain of it will be felt by all of us..."

Like I said upthread: craven, gutless and lily-livered, he deserves to live in infamy.

[Nitram]

47. The pro-Brexit politicians are cowards one and all.

Now that they've won, they don't want to stand up and take responsibility for the transition. Whoever does will be attacked relentlessly by both sides.

[Surya Gayatri]

48. Gutless wonders, all of them. I hope the Tories are tarred with this debacle

for decades to come.

[Nitram]

49. They would deserve to be so tarred, after blaming every ill in UK society on...

..."Brussels" instead of taking responsibility and spending political capital on solutions.

[Surya Gayatri]

50. Their shameless, racist scapegoating has led to an unprecedented

national and international crisis.

Curse them all.