Internal British opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn was developing a plan to stop the U.K from leaving the European Union through legislation aimed at blocking any Brexit without a pre-existing deal.  Additionally, Corbyn was proposing calling a vote of ‘no confidence’ in a scheme aimed at weakening Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s no-deal brexit.

To thwart that opposition plan, PM Boris Johnson asked Queen Elizabeth to suspend Parliament, thereby cancelling the legislative time Corbyn would have to form his anti-Brexit law and scheme. Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II agreed to suspend Parliament.

In addition, Prime Minister Johnson has significantly diminished the ‘no-confidence’ scheme by stating if Corbyn follows through PM Johnson would continue to proceed with the Brexit process, and call for a snap election immediately following the October 31st ‘no deal’ exit from the EU.   The globalist opposition is going bananas.

LONDON – […] The controversy here lies solely in the timing of the move. Britain is on track to leave the European Union on Oct. 31 and anti-Brexit lawmakers were working frantically to try and thwart the departure via the House of Commons — with plans in motion to try and pass legislation to tie the hands of Johnson’s government when Parliament returns from recess on Sept. 3rd.

Specifically, lawmakers were trying to ensure that Britain is not allowed to leave without a formal withdrawal agreement with the E.U., similar to the kind that May secured with E.U. leaders but failed to get through Parliament — leading ultimately to her resignation in June. Johnson has said he would prefer to leave with a deal, but is prepared to leave without one if E.U. leaders won’t meet British demands.

Tuesday’s announcement torpedoes those opposition plans to tie the government’s hands, icing Parliament for the majority of the remainder of the time left before Oct. 31. Speaker John Bercow, who has made no secret of his anti-Brexit sympathies, called the move a “constitutional outrage.” (link)

With so many prior lies, delays and stall tactics by British leadership beholden to the ideology of multinational influence, there were/are many people concerned about whether Prime Minister Johnson could actually be trusted to deliver on the Brexit referendum supported by the majority of the British voters.

Today’s strong moves by the prime minister seem to dissuade some of those fears.  What Great Britain needs is a strong leader who will stand in the gap against relentless leftist opposition and deliver what the people of Britain have voted for.

Today, despite his prior orientation toward fence-sitting weasel-speak, Johnson provides some cautious optimism that he might just be the strong leader the British deserve.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson sent the following letter to members of the House of Commons:

The Daily Mail has more.

Against the backdrop of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson arriving for the G7 summit in Biarritz, France, EU President Donald Tusk holds a press conference to announce the EU will work to block Britains’ exit from the collective, and will not accept terms.

The hubris and arrogance within this declaration, in advance of Johnson’s arrival, is exhibit ‘A’ for exactly the reason British citizens want out of this nonsense. Watch:

.

The likelihood of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump forming an alliance against this insufferable EU collective is beginning to show in the relationships.

There is a strong likelihood PM Johnson and President Trump will form a mutually beneficial economic and trade alliance outside the EU. The euroweanies know this could be devastating to their controlled economic system; their economy is already in trouble.

This will not end well for the EU.  Pride cometh before the fall.

What Trump and Johnson could construct is a bilateral trade deal between the U.S. and the U.K that has genuine reciprocity and negligible trade barriers.  Like a trade freeway between the U.K and the U.S, but only between the U.K. and U.S.

With the EU no longer able to influence trade agreements involving the U.K. European companies, and countries (Poland, Hungary etc.) could get tariff-free access to the U.S. market by operating out of Britain, or using transnational shipping through Britain.

Simultaneously, the U.S. could ship tariff free into the EU (to a receiving EU corporation, or EU subsidiary of a U.S. corporation) by exporting to Britain.  The UK would be the hub for massive economic activity between North America and Europe.

If France (the EU) is charging Canada a high duty for imported Canadian cheese; Canada, through the USMCA pact could ship to a holding company in Britain who would then transfer product (duty free) to the receiving French company who is operating in the U.K, and distributing in France.  [A French company in the U.K. would receive in the U.K without the French (EU) duty.]

Eventually all corporations in the EU, who wanted to do business with North America, would start operations in the U.K….. OR, the EU would have to drop it’s one-way tariff policy (ie. the Marshall plan is ended).  Think about the leverage this creates.

Of course this process would completely change the trade dynamic in Europe; and completely change the trade dynamic between Europe and North America.  So how would Trump and Johnson start?  Answer: Establish an interim tripwire to measure success. Hence you get this phrase:

 “[…] Such a deal could last for something like six months, the official told reporters.”…

Of course an interim deal… because the EU bloc will respond to it… so a reevaluation at six months, prior to any massive investment outlays, is exactly what a CEO would create.

Donald Trump isn’t a politician, he’s working through a plan for what he views (we agree) is bigger than any ideological aspects.  “Economic Security is National Security.”

During the G7 nuance look for the manipulative globalists to try and keep President Trump and Boris Johnson apart during the non-scripted gatherings and assemblies.

The EU does not want the optics of President Trump and Prime Minister Boris Johnson broadcast to the world.   Watch how hard it will be to find pictures of them together.

The Canadian Office of Ethics completed their investigation of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and whether he inappropriately used his office to influence and pressure the Canadian Attorney General to drop criminal charges against a political ally and donor, SNC-Lavalin.  [Backstory Here]

Section 9 of the Canadian Ethics Act prohibits “public office holders from using their position to seek to influence a decision of another person so as to further their own private interests or those of their relatives or friends, or to improperly further another person’s private interests.”

The investigation found:

“Prime Minister Trudeau used his position of authority over Ms. Wilson‑Raybould [AG] to seek to influence, both directly and indirectly, her decision on whether she should overrule the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision not to invite SNC-Lavalin to enter into negotiations towards a remediation agreement.

Therefore, I find that Mr. Trudeau contravened section 9 of the Act.”

In response to the official finding of the Canadian Ethics Office, Justin Trudeau said he “accepted the findings”, but “disagreed with the decision.”

Additionally, Justin from Canada refused to apologize for interfering in the criminal case, breaking the law and violating the duty of his office, because his goal was to protect Canadian workers who might have been negatively impacted if the company was impacted or was barred from doing business.

In essence, a ridiculous virtue-signalling defense. WATCH:

.

Immediately the leftist Canadian media circled-the-wagons to protect the office of the Prime Minister.  The liberal media in Canada agree that all oaths of office are contingent upon only following laws, rules or governmental policies that advance liberalism.  Any liberal or left-leaning target that runs afoul of the laws of Canada can be excused if their intent is to assist the larger progressive cause.

All Canadian media agree, openly and publicly, that if a conservative prime minister was to engage in similar conduct, to the benefit of a company donating to conservative political candidates, that Prime Minister should be immediately removed from office.  It is the political ideology and intent of the office that determines the application of law.

Within the Canadian media response to the transparently illicit conduct of Prime Minister Trudeau, you discover why Canada has a closed media system, called a “cultural industry”.   By law, policy and regulation, including within trade agreements, the media business in Canada is protected by the government from competition.

The “cultural industry” laws are how the liberal Canadian government keeps control of narratives to ensure no political challenges to their ideology ever reach the electorate.  The closest comparison in media systems would be dictatorial state-run media in China, Iran, Turkey or similar ideologically controlled nations.

As a consequence, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was just found by the U.S. equivalent of the Inspector General, to have violated the most fundamental principal of his office and the Canadian legal system; yet he will remain in office to advance the progressive agenda.

That’s Canada.

.