Connect with us

Latest

Video

News

This Houston, Texas woman just destroyed CNN (Video)

Another CNN fail.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

2,351 Views

This Houston woman was not going to let this CNN reporter use her as some sort of prop for her sensationalist reporting on Hurricane Harvey.

When CNN asked how she was coping with the natural disaster, the Houston woman fired back…

People are breaking down and you’re here asking “what the f**k is wrong with us!?”

Texas woman to CNN…

“Yeah, that’s a lot of sh*t. But ya’ll sit here and ya’ll try to interview people during their worst times. Like, that’s not the smartest thing to do! Like people are really breaking down and ya’ll come in here with camera and microphones, trying to ask us what the f*ck is wrong with us!? And you really trying to understand us with the microphone still in my face. With me shivering cold and my kid’s wet and you still putting the microphone in my face.”

CNN then cut to Jim Acosta saying “it sounds like you have a very upset family there.”

What do you think?

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Avramijevdan
Guest
Avramijevdan

Nice and extremely irrelevant. In the meantime USAdists are sleep walking to a war with Russia. If you consider yourself free press (whatever that means) then you should consider writing pieces that will uncover lies about Russia and US. Not pieces that use Russia in order to achieve this or that internal US political gain. Also alt rightards vs left libtards is as relevant as last year’s snow. It means nothing and writing about it means nothing. It is just smoke & mirrors inc. How about writing some more serious stuff. Something devoted to Oliver Stone documentary on USAdistia for… Read more »

ruca
Guest
ruca

Great comment. I suggest you copy and paste it into all msm comment sections. Most people here are aware of what you have presented. Have great day.

Avramijevdan
Guest
Avramijevdan

Thank you but I doubt it my friend. I really do. Even in my country (Serbia) where people pledge their allegiances to Russia on daily basis telling any of this would cause storm and many would rise with indignation against such words. Consequences are simply too much to bare. I am not accusing people for believing in lies about Soviet Union. It took me years to grow out of that shite and to finally face the truth. And as for MSM, my comments in MSM do not go through for very long time. You see in that link I provided… Read more »

Anja Boettcher
Guest
Anja Boettcher

One of the reasons why all these US-style historical narrations which make up popular science, and that is exactly what these people here consume, pose a huge problem, is that they lack any methodological reflection in their provision of numbers. The questions which numbers are taken into consideration and how numbers in different political systems can be compared, cannot be answered without close look at methodological proceedings of historians, which are only reliable, if they do not compare apples with pears. As any naive comparison between people that died prematurely in the SU and in western countries, will provide indeed… Read more »

Avramijevdan
Guest
Avramijevdan

I don’t have any numbers near by but numbers of people that suffered during collectivization and were consequently forced to move to cities were huge,. Huge indeed, more than 20 million for sure and possibly double or triple of that number. Famine of 1932/33 was disastrous as well but it all must be taken within given circumstances. There is no modernizing country unless people move to cities. Dring Tsar time famines were almost yearly occurrences and sometimes in half yest tone Russians say that famine of 1932/33 was an echo from Tsarist time. Now, was any of that done with… Read more »

Anja Boettcher
Guest
Anja Boettcher

The proverb “The Revolution eats her own children” goes even back to the time of the Jakobean phase of the French Revolution – but that this was generally accepted as natural ocurrence in the process of vast historical transformations not only by Russians by all larger European nations over centuries, shows that this is a figure of thought which is of epochal significance. You know I am fond of historical archeology, which not only takes into consideration mere events and single persons, but underlying deep deep patterns (- of cultural significant patterns and collective psychology.) We all rely on the… Read more »

Avramijevdan
Guest
Avramijevdan

No society devoid of God can survive nor it can be just. I am even arguing against Renaissance “man is measure of all things” so I would never accept communist society as a role model. Still I can’t fail to see they wished for good, but road to hell is always paved by good intentions. Ultimately all Communist societies failed under pressure and there is no denying that model was not correct. Still I would argue that some kind of spiritual Communism would probably serve humans the best. Soviet Union as any other historical theme should be finally dealt with… Read more »

Anja Boettcher
Guest
Anja Boettcher

Spiritual communism would require the opposite of materialism, and society relying on it would need to give up on any material manifestation of power. This could only happen by single people beginning to go ahead in transcending materialised base of our lives, exchanging experiences, setting examples visible enough that others could follow them. To a certain degree this would mean monesterial life outside of the seclusion of monasteries. The most basic condition for that was what I described in an earlier post as giving up on the fear at the core of all our societies. “Therefore I tell you: Don’t… Read more »

Avramijevdan
Guest
Avramijevdan

It is up to each and everyone to decide what to do with his own life. You can’t tell them what to do. But people would follow whatever principles society is built upon, be it Communist, Nazi, or whatever. People are like that, they follow autorites. With technology available it should be possible to avoid any economic fears in society. We are one step away from making machines do all the hard work. New world needs cooperation (as you often wrote.) The world is just too complex to be “conquered” by lone man, time of Alexander the Great is long… Read more »

Anja Boettcher
Guest
Anja Boettcher

Societal turning away from the social-Darwinistic logic of permanent accumulation of capital is indespensable for mere human survival. Unfortunately even realising it does not mean that people automatically change practise. They only do so when they sense that an alternative is likely to nourish them, even if it is apparent that clinging to the established mode turns into desaster. Insight that something does not work, changes nothing, but only makes two third of populations apathetic, the rest even more aggressive in their competitiveness (in legal or illegal business.) Therefore cooperative and solidarity-based forms of life need to expand from many… Read more »

Avramijevdan
Guest
Avramijevdan

It looks to me that Christianity is only seriously tried in monasteries (as you wrote) and that is what one can refer to as inner Church. Outer Church, to which the rest of us usually refers to when thinking of Church is something else and I come to believe its purpose is something else too. It probably can not be different since very few are interested in subject anyway. There are testimonies coming from people who visited Athos about monks who possess understanding and are able to lead those who search. But as always their methods involve direct verbal instruction… Read more »

Anja Boettcher
Guest
Anja Boettcher

Living in a country whose cultural history was shaped by the struggle between Catholicism and Protestantism, I cannot say that there was little debating about understanding of scriptures. Only the mindsets in which understanding was collectively shaped shifted increasingly in the course of time along with industrial-technological developments in a direction which was no longer determined by creed. Basically the nations which pressed scientific progress forward since the 18th centuries, were in their majority Protestant and the most secular Catholic society, France. This is small wonder. Lutherian theology, which had rejected mediation in relation of man and God, lay the… Read more »

Vtran
Guest
Vtran

What .. No white helmets …. Where is that Little Girl

Oh forgot, not Aleppo, Not Mediterranean coastline … Russian federation cannot be blamed !

Trauma2000
Guest
Trauma2000

@ Vtran: “Where is that Little Girl”

You mean Bana. Oh she’s fine. She is living in London now and has a job with a P.R. company assisting with media placement services. She performed well; very well. And so they promoted her. Her next jobs are in Eastern Europe and Ukraine. There is a crisis scheduled there in a couple of months and her services have been hired for ‘communication and public perception tasks.’

So, sorry… She’s too busy preparing for the other crises to help out with the Houston crises.

Maryjphillips
Guest
Maryjphillips

Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!!!
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four
weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
>>>http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash190TopVIP/GetPay$97/Hour……

Vtran
Guest
Vtran

Well Jonson is also busy with Banderistan … looks like the English are going to take on RF for Banderists ….

As we already know Mae said happy to use Nukes in a Pre Empt attack on RF even if War had not been declrared

Putin's baby
Guest
Putin's baby

Clinton News Channel was destroyed a long time ago now… just wait for it to vanish completely..

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

Definitively Destroyed or just Destroyed?

7.62x54r
Guest
7.62x54r

CNN and de-moralized US media members do not even lend a hand. The well-paid psychopaths running propaganda for the inhumane US system are shown for what they are.

Keith Smith
Guest
Keith Smith

need to keep pressure on MSM. i believe this wave of censorship is good old fashioned protectionism, people on a shoestring on youtube smashing it. collectively MSM has lost over a billion easy in the last year, i think the guardian in UK lost 160m ish…

Trauma2000
Guest
Trauma2000

You know what… 20 or 30 thousand U.$. troops in there, swap their guns for medic’s and food… problem solved! Seriously! If the MIC would just worry about it’s own house many of the people there could be taken care of, helped out; give shelter, food, long term accomodation and even schooling and three quarters of the homeless problem would be fixed.

… But they don’t. They won’t fix it will they… No.

nshah
Guest
nshah

AWESOME..! Lol..!

Latest

Fake news media FREAK OUT over Trump and NATO (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 172.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the media meltdown over remarks that U.S. President Trump may have made with regard to NATO, and how neo-liberal war hawks championing the alliance as some sort of foreign policy projection of peace and democracy, are really just supporting aggression, war, and the eventual weakening of the United States.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Top 10 Reasons Not to Love NATO, Authored by David Swanson:


The New York Times loves NATO, but should you?

Judging by comments in social media and the real world, millions of people in the United States have gone from having little or no opinion on NATO, or from opposing NATO as the world’s biggest military force responsible for disastrous wars in places like Afghanistan (for Democrats) or Libya (for Republicans), to believing NATO to be a tremendous force for good in the world.

I believe this notion to be propped up by a series of misconceptions that stand in dire need of correction.

1. NATO is not a war-legalizing body, quite the opposite. NATO, like the United Nations, is an international institution that has something or other to do with war, but transferring the UN’s claimed authority to legalize a war to NATO has no support whatsoever in reality. The crime of attacking another nation maintains an absolutely unaltered legal status whether or not NATO is involved. Yet NATO is used within the U.S. and by other NATO members as cover to wage wars under the pretense that they are somehow more legal or acceptable. This misconception is not the only way in which NATO works against the rule of law. Placing a primarily-U.S. war under the banner of NATO also helps to prevent Congressional oversight of that war. Placing nuclear weapons in “non-nuclear” nations, in violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty, is also excused with the claim that the nations are NATO members (so what?). And NATO, of course, assigns nations the responsibility to go to war if other nations go to war — a responsibility that requires them to be prepared for war, with all the damage such preparation does.

2. NATO is not a defensive institution. According to the New York Times, NATO has “deterred Soviet and Russian aggression for 70 years.” This is an article of faith, based on the unsubstantiated belief that Soviet and Russian aggression toward NATO members has existed for 70 years and that NATO has deterred it rather than provoked it. In violation of a promise made, NATO has expanded eastward, right up to the border of Russia, and installed missiles there. Russia has not done the reverse. The Soviet Union has, of course, ended. NATO has waged aggressive wars far from the North Atlantic, bombing Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Serbia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Libya. NATO has added a partnership with Colombia, abandoning all pretense of its purpose being in the North Atlantic. No NATO member has been attacked or credibly threatened with attack, apart from small-scale non-state blowback from NATO’s wars of aggression.

3. Trump is not trying to destroy NATO. Donald Trump, as a candidate and as U.S. President, has wondered aloud and even promised all kinds of things and, in many cases, the exact opposite as well. When it comes to actions, Trump has not taken any actions to limit or end or withdraw from NATO. He has demanded that NATO members buy more weapons, which is of course a horrible idea. Even in the realm of rhetoric, when European officials have discussed creating a European military, independent of the United States, Trump has replied by demanding that they instead support NATO.

4. If Trump were trying to destroy NATO, that would tell us nothing about NATO. Trump has claimed to want to destroy lots of things, good and bad. Should I support NAFTA or corporate media or the Cold War or the F35 or anything at all, simply because some negative comment about it escapes Trump’s mouth? Should I cheer for every abuse ever committed by the CIA or the FBI because they investigate Trump? Should I long for hostility between nuclear-armed governments because Democrats claim Trump is a Russian agent? When Trump defies Russia to expand NATO, or to withdraw from a disarmament treaty or from an agreement with Iran, or to ship weapons to Ukraine, or to try to block Russian energy deals in Europe, or to oppose Russian initiatives on banning cyber-war or weapons in space, should I cheer for such consistent defiance of Trump’s Russian master, and do so simply because Russia is, so implausibly, his so-inept master? Or should I form my own opinion of things, including of NATO?

5. Trump is not working for, and was not elected by, Russia.According to the New York Times, “Russia’s meddling in American elections and its efforts to prevent former satellite states from joining the alliance have aimed to weaken what it views as an enemy next door, the American officials said.” But are anonymous “American officials” really needed to acquire Russia’s openly expressed opinion that NATO is a threatening military alliance that has moved weapons and troops to states on Russia’s border? And has anyone produced the slightest documentation of the Russian government’s aims in an activity it has never admitted to, namely “meddling in American elections,” — an activity the United States has of course openly admitted to in regard to Russian elections? We have yet to see any evidence that Russia stole or otherwise acquired any of the Democratic Party emails that documented that party’s rigging of its primary elections in favor of Clinton over Sanders, or even any claim that the tiny amount of weird Facebook ads purchased by Russians could possibly have influenced the outcome of anything. Supposedly Trump is even serving Russia by demanding that Turkey not attack Kurds. But is using non-military means to discourage Turkish war-making necessarily the worst thing? Would it be if your favorite party or politician did it? If Trump encouraged a Turkish war, would that also be a bad thing because Trump did it, or would it be a bad thing for substantive reasons?

6. If Trump were elected by and working for Russia, that would tell us nothing about NATO. Imagine if Boris Yeltsin were indebted to the United States and ended the Soviet Union. Would that tell us whether ending the Soviet Union was a good thing, or whether the Soviet Union was obsolete for serious reasons? If Trump were a Russian pawn and began reversing all of his policies on Russia to match that status, including restoring his support for the INF Treaty and engaging in major disarmament negotiations, and we ended up with a world of dramatically reduced military spending and nuclear armaments, with the possibility of all dying in a nuclear apocalypse significantly lowered, would that too simply be a bad thing because Trump?

7. Russia is not a military threat to the world. That Russia would cheer NATO’s demise tells us nothing about whether we should cheer too. Numerous individuals and entities who indisputably helped to put Trump in the White House would dramatically oppose and others support NATO’s demise. We can’t go by their opinions either, since they don’t all agree. We really are obliged to think for ourselves. Russia is a heavily armed militarized nation that commits the crime of war not infrequently. Russia is a top weapons supplier to the world. All of that should be denounced for what it is, not because of who Russia is or who Trump is. But Russia spends a tiny fraction of what the United States does on militarism. Russia has been reducing its military spending each year, while the United States has been increasing its military spending. U.S. annual increases have sometimes exceeded Russia’s entire military budget. The United States has bombed nine nations in the past year, Russia one. The United States has troops in 175 nations, Russia in 3. Gallup and Pew find populations around the world viewing the United States, not Russia, as the top threat to peace in the world. Russia has asked to join NATO and the EU and been rejected, NATO members placing more value on Russia as an enemy. Anonymous U.S. military officials describe the current cold war as driven by weapons profits. Those profits are massive, and NATO now accounts for about three-quarters of military spending and weapons dealing on the globe.

8. Crimea has not been seized. According to the New York Times, “American national security officials believe that Russia has largely focused on undermining solidarity between the United States and Europe after it annexed Crimea in 2014. Its goal was to upend NATO, which Moscow views as a threat.” Again we have an anonymous claim as to a goal of a government in committing an action that never occurred. We can be fairly certain such things are simply made up. The vote by the people of Crimea to re-join Russia is commonly called the Seizure of Crimea. This infamous seizure is hard to grasp. It involved a grand total of zero casualties. The vote itself has never been re-done. In fact, to my knowledge, not a single believer in the Seizure of Crimea has ever advocated for re-doing the vote. Coincidentally, polling has repeatedly found the people of Crimea to be happy with their vote. I’ve not seen any written or oral statement from Russia threatening war or violence in Crimea. If the threat was implicit, there remains the problem of being unable to find Crimeans who say they felt threatened. (Although I have seen reports of discrimination against Tartars during the past 4 years.) If the vote was influenced by the implicit threat, there remains the problem that polls consistently get the same result. Of course, a U.S.-backed coup had just occurred in Kiev, meaning that Crimea — just like a Honduran immigrant — was voting to secede from a coup government, by no means an action consistently frowned upon by the United States.

9. NATO is not an engaged alternative to isolationism. The notion that supporting NATO is a way to cooperate with the world ignores superior non-deadly ways to cooperate with the world. A nonviolent, cooperative, treaty-joining, law-enforcing alternative to the imperialism-or-isolationism trap is no more difficult to think of or to act on than treating drug addiction or crime or poverty as reason to help people rather than to punish them. The opposite of bombing people is not ignoring them. The opposite of bombing people is embracing them. By the standards of the U.S. communications corporations Switzerland must be the most isolationist land because it doesn’t join in bombing anyone. The fact that it supports the rule of law and global cooperation, and hosts gatherings of nations seeking to work together is simply not relevant.

10. April 4 belongs to Martin Luther King, Jr., not militarism. War is a leading contributor to the growing global refugee and climate crises, the basis for the militarization of the police, a top cause of the erosion of civil liberties, and a catalyst for racism and bigotry. A growing coalition is calling for the abolition of NATO, the promotion of peace, the redirection of resources to human and environmental needs, and the demilitarization of our cultures. Instead of celebrating NATO’s 70thanniversary, we’re celebrating peace on April 4, in commemoration of Martin Luther King Jr.’s speech against war on April 4, 1967, as well as his assassination on April 4, 1968.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Turkey prepared to take Syria’s Manbij, won’t let it turn into ‘swamp’ like N. Iraq

Turkey sees the US-backed Kurdish YPG militias as an extension of the PKK and considers them terrorists as well.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT


Ankara has “almost completed” preparations for another military operation in Syria and will launch it if “promises” made by other parties about the protection of its borders are not kept, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said.

Turkey still hopes that talks with the US, Russia and “other parties” will allow it to ensure its security without resorting to force but it is still ready to proceed with a military option and will not “wait forever,” Erdogan said. He was referring to Ankara’s plans for the northern Syrian territories east of the Euphrates River, which it seeks to turn into a “security zone”free of any Kurdish militias.

“We are on our border with our forces and following developments closely. If promises made to us are kept and the process goes on, that’s fine. Otherwise, we inform that we have almost completed our preparations and will take steps in line with our own strategy,” the president said, addressing a group of businessmen in Ankara on Monday.

He did not elaborate on the promises made. However, they are apparently linked to the withdrawal of the Kurdish YPG militia from the Manbij area and the regions along the border with Turkey. “We will never allow a safe zone to turn into a new swamp,” Erdogan said, referring to the northern Syrian territories and comparing them to the northern Iraq, where the militants from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) – an organization that Ankara considers a terrorist group – have been entrenched for decades.

Turkey sees the US-backed Kurdish YPG militias, which form the backbone of the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), as an extension of the PKK and considers them terrorists as well. “Our proposal for a security zone under Turkey’s control aims to keep terror organizations away from our borders,” the Turkish president said.

He went on to explain that Ankara does not seek any territorial gains in its military campaigns in Syria but merely seeks to restore order in the war-ravaged country. “We will provide security for Manbij and then we will hand over the city to its real owners,” Erdogan said. “Syria belongs to Syrians.”

Turkey also seeks to establish a “security zone 20 miles [32 kilometers] deep” into Syria, Erdogan said, adding that he already discussed this issue with the US President Donald Trump. “Those who insistently want to keep us away from these regions are seeking to strengthen terror organizations,” he added.

Ankara has been long planning to push YPG units out of the area east of the Euphrates River. Its operation was delayed by the US withdrawal from Syria. However, Erdogan repeatedly hinted that his patience is wearing thin and he is not ready to wait much longer. He warned Trump against backtracking on his pledge to withdraw some 2,000 US forces out of Syria following a suicide attack in Manbij that killed four Americans. If the US president halted the withdrawal, it would mean that Islamic State (formerly ISIS/ISIL) had won, Erdogan argued.

He has also reiterated that Turkey is ready to take over Manbij “without delay.” The US military is currently working on security arrangements with the Turkish forces to create a buffer zone between Turkey and the Kurdish fighters. The Kurds, meanwhile, invited the Syrian government to take over the city and have reportedly begun to leave the area. Turkey has dismissed the reports saying its a “psyop”.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Political Knives Dull Themselves on the Rock of Brexit Article 50

The invocation of Article 50 was undertaken by an act of Parliament. And it will take another act of Parliament to undo it.

Strategic Culture Foundation

Published

on

Authored Tom Luongo via Strategic Culture Foundation:


Theresa “The Gypsum Lady” May went through an extraordinary twenty-four hours. First, seeing her truly horrific Brexit deal go down in historic defeat and then, somehow, surviving a ‘No-Confidence’ vote which left her in a stronger position than before it.

It looks like May rightly calculated that the twenty or so Tory Remainers would put party before the European Union as their personal political positions would be terminally weakened if they voted her out of office.

While there is little stomach in the British Parliament for a ‘no-deal’ Brexit, there is less for allowing Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn to become Prime Minister. And that is the crux of why the incessant calls to delay Brexit, call for a ‘people’s vote’ or, in Corbyn’s case, “take a no-deal Brexit off the table,’ ultimately lead to a whole lot of political knife-fighting and very little substantive action.

The day-to-day headline spam is designed to wear down people’s resistance and make it feel like Brexit getting betrayed is inevitable. That has been the British Deep State’s and EU’s game plan all along and they hoped they could arm-twist enough people in parliament to succeed.

But the problem for them now, since the clock has nearly run out, is the invocation of Article 50 was undertaken by an act of Parliament. And it will take another act of Parliament to undo it.

And I don’t see anyone on the Remainer side working towards that end. That should be your clue as to what happens next.

Why? Because they know they don’t have the time to get that act past Parliament. So, the rest of this is simply a PR campaign to push public opinion far enough to allow for an illegal canceling or postponing of Brexit.

But it’s not working.

According to the latest polls, Brits overwhelmingly want the original Brexit vote respectedLeave even has a 5-6 point lead over Remain.

And, I think Theresa May now realizes this. It is why she invited the no-confidence vote against her. She knew she had the votes and it would give her the ammunition to ignore Corbyn’s hysterical ranting about taking a no-deal Brexit off the table.

Whether she realizes that the only negotiating tool she has with the EU is the threat of a No-Deal Brexit, exactly like Nigel Farage and those committed to Brexit have been telling her for two years is still, however, up in the air.

It looks like she’s finally starting to get it.

The net result is we are seeing a similar outing of the nefarious, behind-the-scenes, power brokers in the public eye similar to what’s been happening in the US with Donald Trump and Russiagate.

May has been singularly unimpressive in her handling of Brexit. I’ve been convinced from the beginning that betraying Brexit was always her goal. Negotiating a deal unacceptable to anyone was meant to exhaust everyone into the position to just throwing up their hands and canceling the whole thing.

The EU has been in the driver’s seat the entire time because most of the British establishment has been on their side and it was only the people who needed to be disrespected.

So, after all of these shananigans we are back to where we were last week. May has cut off all avenues of discussion. She won’t commit to taking ‘no-deal’ off the table to tweak Corbyn. She won’t substantively move on any other issue. This is likely to push her deal through as a last-minute panic move.

Corbyn is still hoping to get new elections to take power, and the majority of MP’s who don’t want to leave the EU keep fighting among themselves to cock up the entire works.

All they are doing is expending pound after pound of political capital beating themselves against their own act of Parliament which goes into effect on March 29th.

By the time that date comes around the frustration, shame and humiliation of how Parliament has mishandled Brexit will make it difficult for a lot of Remainers to hold together their majority as public opinion has decidedly turned against them.

In the past the EU has had that façade of democratic support undermining any change at the political level. With Brexit (and with budget talks in Italy) that is not the case. The people are angry.

The peak moment for Remainers to stage a bipartisan political coup against May should have been the most recent no-confidence vote.

With May surviving that it implies that Remainers are not willing to die politically for their cause.

This should begin to see defectors over the next couple of weeks as they realize they don’t have a hand to play either.

And by May refusing to rule out a ‘no-deal’ Brexit it has finally brought the EU around to throw a bone towards the British. Their admitting they would extend Article 50 is just that. But they know that’s a non-starter as that is the one thing May has been steadfast in holding to.

On March 29th with or without a deal the U.K. is out of the EU. Because despite the European Court of Justice’s decision, Britain’s parliament can only cancel Article 50 at this point by acting illegally.

Not that I would put that past these people, but then that opens up a can of worms that most British MP’s will not go along with. The personal stakes are simply too high.

When dealing with politicians, never bet against their vanity or their pocketbook. In May’s case she may finally have realized she could have the legacy of getting Britain out of the EU just before it collapses.

And all she has to do between now and the end of March is, precisely, nothing.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending