Brexit, the first 100, and now nearly 200 days.

The Remoaners show their contempt for the voters.

Osborne, standing up for what? Osborne, standing up for what?
Brexit, we have had the first 100 days, it slipped past unnoticed and now we are on our way to the 200 mark. It's a tradition that politicians like to tell us their plans for the first 100 days after getting into office. But this time it's different, it is the other way around. We the voters had the plans for ourselves, we voted Leave. Then the idea was the politicians got on with the job of getting us out of the EU. So for them the fun has gone out of it all! Prior to the June 23rd vote many politicians assumed Remain would win. A typical example is George Osborne who is on record as having admitted he did not 'understand' people outside of London who were angry with both Westminster and the EU. Osborne suggests they felt 'disconnected', this tells us a lot about him. His remarks are classic blame-shift as it was not the voters who were remote but the politicians like himself who had lost touch with reality. But then you could say there's very little Osborne understands. He has indicated he is proud because Birmingham will next year have an election for the post of Mayor, but this fails to spot that Birmingham has in the past voted against having a Mayor! Could it be that actions like these make politicians unpopular?

But when it comes to those who don't understand it's sooner rather than later you hear the name, Anthony Charles Lynton Blair. Blair is a part-time democrat in that it suits him when he wins. In just a short time both the publication of the Chilcot report and the vote for Brexit, he has found himself on the wrong side. He has described the vote to leave the EU as a, 'catastrophe'. How odd he should use that word to describe a referendum, the same word that so aptly applies to much of his political career. And how typical of this awful man that he is so vocal about Brexit at the same time the Chilcot report is, in effect, telling us what we knew all along, that he cannot be trusted. Remember the Jo Moore episode? This was when Moore, a Labour Spin Doctor, suggested that the day of the attack on the World Trade Centre was an ideal day to 'bury bad news'. Well it looked like the old tricks, the distraction and deflection tactics, were being wheeled out again. Blair even said the case for leaving the EU, “had crumbled”. He seemed more than happy to speak out, on any subject, so long as Chilcot posed a threat to him.

But saying daft things post Brexit, for any reason, seems to have caught on, then again we heard so much of this sort of thing pre-Brexit perhaps we should not be surprised. Project Fear was quite an education, not just politicians but all manner of public servants showed just how really stupid they were. Heads of the security services and police lined up to tell us we would be mad to leave, and the public ignored them. Once gone public trust is hard to rebuild. And post Brexit we hear that people did not know what they were voting for! I was told by a Remainer that “nobody was interested”. Considering that over 72% of the nation voted that has to be anti-democratic sour grapes on an astonishing scale. Then the law, in the form of the Supreme Court got involved. The term, 'Majesty of the law' makes you think, but alas in this case what was on show was anything but majestic.The whole thing takes its lead from a crowd funded initiative and so far 'the crowd' does not number more than 5000 people. When you consider that 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU this does look to be a majority verdict!

The basis of the Peoples Justice case is that we are losing rights due to Brexit, so they must act to preserve these rights. But this is ridiculous, we have been losing rights because of our membership of the EU for a very long time. It has been a notable feature of this process that the current crop of crowd funders were silent throughout. So we may wonder as to why they are now getting agitated? It really does look as if their motive is to stall or even stop Brexit. But the Supreme Court was up for it so has gleefully got stuck in. Their judgement will come some time in the new year and this shows a poor sense of timing. For the government has been given an opportunity to out manoeuvre them. On the run up to the Supreme Court hearing it was natural for the media to look into what was to come. Some newspapers concluded certain judges could, by virtue of their past comments and actions, be very pro-EU. These newspapers were then accused of demonising the judges. This was a pathetic reaction as the press was simply doing it job, it was looking at a public servant much as it would a police officer or civil servant.

But post Leveson there has always been a bit of a battle going on between the legal profession and the press. We must remember that Leveson was given the task of introducing more press regulation at a time when the press were under intense pressure and scrutiny. Leveson accused the press of 'wanting to mark their own home work' when they objected. However, as we have seen when the Supreme Court judges come to be scrutinised this amounts to demonising them. The judges are to be trusted without exception, so they tell us, despite some of them talking, pre-hearing, in a way which suggests otherwise. So this time it's the judges marking their own homework and behaving badly.

We should also look at what Barack Obama has been doing of late. No doubt peeved that Donald Trump won the US election and keen to deal with the suggestion this had something to do with himself he phoned Vladimir Putin to accuse him of trying to influence the election. This was funny as Obama had made himself available to project fear when he tried to influence the Brexit referendum. We may wonder what Putin made of all this, did he laugh?

And to the BBC. After the Brexit referendum the BBC found umpteen people who now regretted the way they had voted, but always those who had voted to leave the EU, they were confused or misled, and now filled with remorse. Well recently there was a by-election in Richmond Park and it was won by the pro-EU LibDems. And so far the BBC has accepted this result for what it is, no attempt 'to prove' there has been an awful mishap by finding the remorseful and 'giving them a voice'. It does make you wonder if the BBC are impartial after all! While on the subject of Richmond Park the Mayor of London and fervent Remainer, Sadiq Khan, got terribly excited about the LibDem victory. He tried to make out this was some kind of important moment for Remain, but alas showed that at practical politics he's not half as good as he thinks he is. For his party, Labour, failed to get even 4% of the vote, and what is the point in fighting old battles? The whisper going around is that Khan will take Labour out of the mess caused by present leader Corbyn. But then pigs might fly, although this might not be the best way of putting it!

So will Khan look to Bob Geldof for advice? All through the referendum campaign Geldof was for Remain. It was Geldof and Brendan Cox, husband of the murdered MP Jo Cox, who made a point of disrupting a demonstration in favour of Leave by Cornish fishermen. And did so in a way that was distasteful and counter-productive. And there at Richmond Park, Geldof, the man with the mouth was doing his best for the LibDems. But just weeks later Geldof says the EU, 'does not work'. But then neither do celebrity endorsements, or not from him at any rate! In the world of the celebrity you have to stay in the limelight and be reinventing yourself all the time, anything goes so long as you can stay on top. Geldof has that light-weight but attention grabbing style to do just this. And in doing so he damages everything he touches, so the Mayor of London should be careful.

We must not forget the role of the Guardian in all this. It was a keen Remainer and signed up to Project Fear in a big way. Prior to the referendum any mention of the risk of an EU army to the UK by a Leave campaigner was met with the sort of contemptuous scoffing the Metropolitan elite have made their trade mark. Then just weeks after the result the plans to create such an army were announced! Naturally the Guardian goes in for finger-wagging at other media outlets on the subject of fake news but is guilty of the very same thing itself. Then there is their tag line, 'comment is free'. We may assume this is a nudge from them for us to think of free as in 'free speech'. But this is not so, public comment is only allowed under certain articles thus they are trying to steer public opinion. So in reality it's pure propaganda and this does not go down well. The Guardian is quick to comment upon the economics behind Brexit, it knows we will all starve, survival is impossible. But you may wonder at this position when we see they are in deep financial trouble. So should we trust them as they cannot manage their own newspaper?

But the last word on the Guardian goes to ex-MP Austin Mitchell, always a Leaver he is also the sort of democrat and libertarian thinker they should be able to rely on. But no, he has had enough of their patter, it's a must read, beautifully put . So, trouble financially and with their content, serves them right!