You can see LibDem leader Farron getting a roasting from Andrew Neil in the video above over his lies about the Brexit referendum which he claims does not give a mandate to leave the Single Market…despite it being absolutely clear, and made so by politicans on both sides of the referendum again and again, that to vote to leave the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.
If Andrew Neil can do it why cannot so many other BBC presenters? How many times have I heard Farron get away with murder as he spins his lies about respecting the result of the referendum and it being essential that the British Public have the last say when it is also absolutely clear he means none of it?
Mishal Husain on the BBC’s flagship political programme [07:09] that should, you’d think, be up to the job of quizzing Farron rigorously and forensically examining his statements for post-truth statements. Not so. Her main concern was one of semantics, whether or not it was the correct description of the vote Farron wants to call it a ‘second referendum’. Farron was otherwise allowed to escape scrutiny on what is the central question to this attack on Brexit by him….whether there is a mandate for leaving the Single Market….clearly there is but Husain was not interested in the slightest in challenging his highly misleading narrative.
Farron told us that the vote would not be a second referendum but would be about the terms of the deal, the referendum was about a departure he says, not a destination….hmmm…pretty sure most voters had an idea of what they wanted and weren’t voting simply to leave the EU as an end in itself…they had reasons for doing so and a ‘destination’ in mind…again not challenged by Husain.
Farron said the British people should have the final say…hmmm…they have just had that…the government advice on the referendum was that it was the final and binding vote…the result would be respected by government and carried out by them…shame the Supreme Court judges don’t seem to have read that as they have decided that the referendum was not binding but merely advice. [Note 3 of the 8 judges backed the government…so an issue of law or of opinion? Opinion. Thus subject to personal views. And note one judge said the courts should not have been involved...so Daily Mail was right…BBC shows no interest in this judge’s words oddly enough]
Farron said that if the second referendum rejected the deal on Brexit that would be final and we would stay in the EU. He was challenged here……on the description of the vote.
Curiously Farron says he accepts that the government has a mandate to negotiate but not for what he likes to call a Hard Brexit….in other words a Brexit as voted for in the referendum…you know…the one which did give the government a mandate to leave the Single Market….again no challenge from Husain.
He suggests that if the democratic will of the people is not fulfilled then there will be dissent on the streets and it will lead to a failure of trust in the political system. LOL. Farron is at the heart of the elite’s project to snub the people and damn democracy….Brexit was essentially all about a failure of trust in politicians..and every word that comes out of Farron’s mouth proves why they were right to reject him and his collaborators. He goes on…neither judges, MPs or Lords should have the final say…except they will of course, under Farron’s plan, as they will shape Brexit to their liking, ie no Brexit, and if the people reject that deal then we stay in the EU he says.
So to be clear…Farron wants all those Remain MPs who have the whip hand majority to decide what Brexit should look like, and when they have engineered it so that essentially it is a deal that means we stay in the EU the people will get a vote and as the majority want to leave the EU they will reject such a deal…which means under Farron’s plan we stay in the EU….genius. Heads Farron wins, tails Farron wins.
Again no challenge.
He then finishes on a douzey…considering his, er, respect for the referendum and democracy…..because, he tells us, the margin was so narrow it would be anti-democratic to carry out what the result of the referendum would entail…therefore we must do what the 48% want and not the 52%…that’s the democratic way, that’s what will unite the country, according to Farron. I might suggest you will have a civil war and not a united country. But again no challenge to his delusions and lies.
Remarkable journalism from Husain.
If you want confirmation of Farron’s ability to delude himself and lie through his teeth just watch the video above when he is talking about the Richmond by-election. He tells us that the by-election was about whatever the electorate wanted it to be about, and it was about Brexit…they don’t want to leave the Single Market or the Custom’s Union. Hmmm…surely they should wait until they have heard the decisive and democratic decision of Parliament before deciding themselves. How can they possibly make up their own minds without the help of Farron and his pals? It seems that when the vote is apparently against Brexit in a by-election [in a hard-core Remain voting constituency] then Farron is willing to accept their verdict without a Parliamentary debate and yet he thinks the actual referendum on this very specific subject is invalid and needs Parliamentary scrutiny and approval.
More Andrew Neil’s please…less useless doormats.
The BBC ‘fact-checking’ for false news? My arse.