Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
As usual, Boris is talking through both sides of his mouth (and his arse) at once, saying On the one hand, yes we are breaking international law, and on the other, we are merely clarifying it. In the meantime he has lost another top civil servant.

It will probably end up as a damp squib as most of his manoeuvrers do, but what is absolutely stunning is that the Brits seem to think this will help their negotiating prospects.

Any prospect of the EU making some last minute concessions, which they have already prepared in advance, has probably disappeared at this stage. Why go out on a limb to secure a deal when the UK might very well disown it next year anyway?

I wouldn't be surprised if the EU will row back on some concessions they have already made. There is no room for ambiguity - the hard currency of compromise - when all trust has been lost.

The UK seems to continually misinterpret the EU's willingness to talk as a sign of weakness. It must be a culturing thing. Boris' idea of negotiation is all about amateur dramatics - walk outs, cliff edges, overnight talks, inspired leaks, planted stories to undermine trust in Barnier.

Don't they get it? Barnier will probably walk into the sunset on Jan 1st. deal or no deal, and it will change absolutely nothing in the EU's negotiating stance, which will probably just get more hardline as these aggravations continue.

Brexit will be consigned to history and any remaining contacts with the UK will be at below commissioner level while the Trade Commissioner gets on with trade negotiations with countries which actual know how to negotiate one.

Its over.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Sep 8th, 2020 at 10:03:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
A news report surfaced over the weekend that Boris has been fascinated by Trump's willingness to lie, walk away from contracts and deals when it suits him to do so. I imagine this nonsense plays well with the tabloid brexiter support who are always easily wound up by displays of macho "John Bull"-like behaviour.

It's cultural conservatism; create a confected spat which allows you to apper to defend some hallowed cultural institution, the last night of the  proms, the integrity of the Ulster connection and then get kudos when you "win".

I still believe that Boris Scummings has no interest in a deal of any sort with the EU. I base this on the principle of follow the money.
Who paid for brexit? High net worth individuals within the Finance industry, most of whom work in hedge funds.
How do these people profit? By shorting (betting against) doomed stocks and profiting from the resulting crash.
No deal brexit is the greatest short opportunity in history and there are a lot of hedge funders in Boris' close circle. No deal has always been the objective.
Once its done and the money is banked, I fully expect the senior leavers to decamp before the tabloid public realise the extent to which they were conned. Although they will no doubt waste a year blaming Corbyn and the EU.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Wed Sep 9th, 2020 at 07:38:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, these kind of tactics come directly from "The Art of the Squeal" by an American Reality TV turned politician. Trouble is: it works only when you are in a position of strength and the other party can be easily intimidated. Someone's nose will get bloodied.
by Bernard on Wed Sep 9th, 2020 at 08:35:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Eton has a culture of bullying, and some people never grow out of it.

But dictators are usually made of sterner stuff. Johnson isn't even good at bullying. He's too mercurial and too stupid to be good at it. A lack of strategic foresight combines with infinite self-regard to create - an empty suit, with a vapid grin and charisma that only works on the over 65s and selected elements in the UK's desperate underclass.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Sep 9th, 2020 at 11:22:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And after that they may realize that Corbyn would have been better, and blame the Jews for destroying him. (They should really blame the Tory antisemites, but this is England).
by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Wed Sep 9th, 2020 at 05:46:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Virtually no one in the UK believes Corbyn would have been better.

Of course he would, but no one seems to be able to accept that.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Sep 9th, 2020 at 08:26:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It is very difficult for most people to accept they have been played for a fool. They would rather double down on the con than admit their mistake. The Tories are still in the lead over Labour, and Trump has never been below 40% support in the average of polls. The trend may be downward in both cases, but it is at a slow generational pace as older people die off without ever having admitted their mistake.

Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Sep 9th, 2020 at 10:14:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think even that explains Corbyn Derangement Syndrome. He simply wasn't seen as a credible leader, but Johnson - oh the hilarity - was.

The media had a lot to do with it, but that wasn't the entire story. Merely by existing, Corbyn somehow violated a sacred foundation of tribal Englishness.

Maybe he came over as an annoying school teacher. Maybe he was too obviously one of the metropolitan elites, troubled by an education and a conscience. Maybe he was just too middle class, and at the same time not aggressively and selfishly middle class enough. Maybe the Labour Right, as represented by the Guardian, just didn't want him to win because taxes and narcissism.

Whatever it was, many voters didn't warm to it. They preferred the lying sociopathic posho drunk who hid in a fridge over the rather boring and staid opposition leader, with his principles, his social conscience, and his optimistic plan for the future.

Ultimately it was a total collapse in the integrity of the English moral character. And so here we are.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Sep 9th, 2020 at 11:58:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Speaking of Corbyn, what is the state of Labour these days? Is Starmer merely a return to Blairism? Is Momentum and the Labour Left wing active or has it collapsed in despair?
by fjallstrom on Thu Sep 10th, 2020 at 09:41:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
by epochepoque on Sat Sep 12th, 2020 at 02:04:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
From here he seems mostly bad:

Can't be seen not to be Tories:

No Deal is now just another few % in the polls for the hacks:

Purging the left:
Rebecca Long-Bailey sacking reignites Labour turmoil over antisemitism | Rebecca Long-Bailey | The Guardian
Keir Starmer is facing a showdown with the left of Labour after his decisive sacking of Rebecca Long-Bailey reignited the party's internal turmoil over the issue of antisemitism.

And throwing money away to have it in print that Corbyn was an anti-semite:
Labour to pay `substantial damages' to antisemitism whistleblowers | The Independent | The Independent
Labour has agreed to pay "substantial damages'' to seven whistleblowers over "defamatory and false allegations'' made following a BBC Panorama investigation into antisemitism.

Terminal lib brain:

I haven't seen much Momentum or Labour left activity, but that doesn't mean it isn't there, just that I'm paying much less attention.

by generic on Wed Sep 16th, 2020 at 01:25:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hedge funds and shorts :

It would be opportune for Labour to go public, and go big, on this subject before Brexitcrash. To the effect that insider trading of this sort will be prosecuted under the next Labour government. Might not such activities reasonably be qualified as treasonous?

They would of course require Interpol co-operation to round up the high-net-worth expatriate plotters.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Thu Sep 10th, 2020 at 08:42:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Why is that insider trading? Don't we all know about Brexit?
by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Thu Sep 10th, 2020 at 09:32:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The current Labour leadership are no more likely to interfere with backroom financial plays than the Democratic leadership in the US is, and Starmer will go after the banksters about as much as Obama did.
by rifek on Wed Sep 23rd, 2020 at 03:19:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Neither major party in the US is independent of Wall Street, that is nothing new. If anything, the democrats deliver more favorable economic policies--if that is the metric.
by asdf on Wed Sep 23rd, 2020 at 10:24:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]