The prorogation was lawful
 

RH156RH wrote:
Try this logic: the monarch is above the law (fact). In law it is the
monarch not Johnson who has made the order to prorogue. Ergo, what
Johnson's motives were or were not is irrelevant to the the question of
the prorogation because it is the monarch who has made it. Ergo, the
prorogation is lawful because the Queen is above the law and is the font of all law...RH


Im not convinced that thats how the law actually works, but it doesnt
matter either way really; this whole squalid debacle is simply a minor but
crucial part of the eventual proletariat uprising and subsequent public
guillotining of the entire Royal Family, so the precise technical details
dont really come into it. HTH. Ta. Viva la revolution!

--
M0TEY // STC
www.twitter.com/ukradioamateur

The prorogation was lawful
 

MM wrote:
On 12 Sep 2019 06:18:37 GMT, Stephen Cole
wrote:

RH156RH wrote:
Try this logic: the monarch is above the law (fact). In law it is the
monarch not Johnson who has made the order to prorogue. Ergo, what
Johnson's motives were or were not is irrelevant to the the question of
the prorogation because it is the monarch who has made it. Ergo, the
prorogation is lawful because the Queen is above the law and is the font of all law...RH


IÂ’m not convinced that thatÂ’s how the law actually works, but it doesnÂ’t
matter either way really; this whole squalid debacle is simply a minor but
crucial part of the eventual proletariat uprising and subsequent public
guillotining of the entire Royal Family, so the precise technical details
donÂ’t really come into it. HTH. Ta. Viva la revolution!

+1

WHS

--
M0TEY // STC
www.twitter.com/ukradioamateur