Dr David Starkey's Brutal Analysis On Supreme Court Prorogation Ruling

Dr David Starkey railed against the Supreme Court ruling, insisting that it completely changes the way parliament will govern.
The 11 justices of the Supreme Court ruled that Boris Johnson's prorogation was unlawful - a decision that Dr Starkey vehemently disagreed with.
Speaking to Iain Dale, the constitutional historian said: "The language of the verdict verge was political. It is not for judges to rule on political truthfulness.
Make sure you never miss a single word of our world-leading discussion by subscribing here: bit.ly/Subscrib...
Watch More Here:
Time for Tasers: bit.ly/2kd6bVG
Donald Trump: bit.ly/2kCQZ4k
EU Elections 2019: bit.ly/2lGIplm
The Nigel Farage Show: bit.ly/2m3ullW
Find out more about how to listen along and join in the conversation at www.lbc.co.uk/
This is not your ordinary talk radio stream. LBC is the leading KZbin channel for live debate around the news and current affairs. We have live interviews and debates and you can even phone in to join in the conversation.

[@maxburton8270]

I voted to remain but cannot support undemocratic actions of remain so will vote to leave if I have an opportunity. People matter.

[@saberint]

Sorry, pls explain what here is not democratic

[@tontopavarotti]

saberint the fact that 17.4 million people voted to LEAVE! and this vote has not been undertaken. The MP’s said they would respect the will, with a deal or without a deal. That’s is what is undemocratic.

[@joemitchell1287]

Max Burton - Nice try, but you did not vote to remain. You know it, I know it. If you cannot support undemocratic actions, then you wouldn't now change your mind knowing that vote leave broke the law and you would know now, even more than you knew 3 years ago how damaging Brexit will be. So no, you did not vote to remain, you voted to leave.

[@mrobserver474]

@@saberint WHAT HERE IS NOT DEMOCRATIC are all those MP's who were elected for whatever party on the basis of whatever manifesto by constituents who then combined together across their individual political support in a NATIONAL vote to leave in the referendum. ONLY for those MP's to then BETRAY & DESERT those very constituents who elected them

[@stefansamuels8605]

Joe Mitchell I take it you’re a typical liberal who thinks he’s entitled to tell people what they can and can’t think?

[@alibobsmarland9572]

Spot on. Let's guess how many of the judges voted to remain. Totally biased political ruling.

[@saintceee]

2 of them sit on the EU court of human rights in Strasborg...go figure.

[@ant1georgiou]

saintceee - is that true??

[@peterholden9357]

Alibobs Marland - Prison is full of people who believe judges are corrupt and out to get them as well! Food for thought eh?

[@steveaustin4118]

​@@ant1georgiou Lady Arden and Lord Reed

[@best7best711]

@@saintceee to hell with those human rights people!!!! Fool!

[@AngloHuscarl]

Give us a General Election, and let the People drain the SWAMP of self-interest 'Career' Politicians. This is the start of the end of the Old Parliament!

[@alanbatty3825]

I totally agree, but there's just one problem. We need to find 600 poloticians who are not self-serving careerists. That, I think, is impossible given the current structure. We need to change the "first man past the post" way of counting votes, and go to "one man/woman, one vote". Another thing we need to do - and this applies to practically every "democracy" I can think of - is to change the way parliamentary campaigns are paid for. Lose the lobbyists, we cannot have anything like true democracy while the oil companies and banks are funding the politicians who tout their crap for them once they're in office. This is much bigger than just Brexit, as Starkey says. And he is right, the last time we had a constitutional crisis like this, it led to war.

[@douglashurrell4766]

They are to yellow to have an election

[@rosemaryspencer1501]

YES.

[@Freespeech141]

I do hope so, the pomposity is staggering!

[@trishadick3786]

@@alanbatty3825 we have to keep Boris just until he requests an extension which he is duty bound to do then a GE to oust the tories so we just need patience

[@theshootist3873]

Dr. Starkey is correct, eloquent and erudite. This might explain why he is not a politician......

[@theshootist3873]

Andrew W. Indeed!

[@theedge9709]

Weally ?

[@Telcontar1962]

He maybe all those things.....but he's decades late in coming to the conclusions he is.

[@theshootist3873]

Telcontar1962 probably just the first time we’ve heard him, rather than him being late to those conclusions i would have thought.....

[@Telcontar1962]

@@theshootist3873 Not having heard of him is certainly possible although he does have rather a high profile on mainstream and an increasingly prominent presence on the internet too. But I can assure you he has never said the things he is saying recently. I nearly fell of my chair the other week when on someone's YT channel he actually questioned the monarchy's role in all this. He's is an ardent monarchist who is finally coming round to the realisation that no one in government be it monarch, MP, senior civil servant or judge have clean hands with regards the EU. They are all compromised to some extent and therefore none of them can be trusted to perform their constitutional role having abandoned it for so long. This is the ace the EU has always had to play and why to rid ourselves of its illegal presence we are going to have to destroy virtually everything politically and start again. Its not a pleasant prospect but we have a debt to pay. This country is ours. Its ours to steward and pas on to our children and anyone who attacks that has to be prepared to pay the highest of prices as do we in its defence. We owe those who went before and those who are yet to come no less.

[@stephenmiller3698]

Starkey should be in parliament.

[@rosemaryspencer1501]

Yes he should.

[@alexmuir2815]

yes he should the english parliament then he would get to know it is the uk government

[@shinelight727]

David Starkey is so right. He's a National Treasure.

[@jjames6338]

Hard line English nationalist who down grades the contribution of the Celtic British people to the development of the United Kingdom including the military.

[@gardenroom65]

1649 Charles 1 beheaded

[@roywilliams4187]

Who dug him up?

[@MrTommyb74]

Like Michael Heseltine.

[@roywilliams4187]

I’ve never seen Michael Heseltine described as a national treasure.

[@2e0rlrrod23]

I blame Tony Blair he created the supreme court!!

[@patrickkyle4601]

and he and his "acolyte" Brown landed us with the Lisbon treaty.

[@chrisguy1790]

All the judges are labour supporters

[@tedhuges8275]

Blair’s gang of 11. All friends together. All come from the same Maggot box

[@ronmorris1199]

You don't need to mention the supreme court. Blair is to be blamed for a lot more than that!

[@jortak1169]

@@ronmorris1199 including climate change, the death of Diana and the rise of fascism in the 1930s

[@games4fun749]

It was the Blair government that put the wheels in motion that created the crap show we have today .

[@deeestuary]

Basically what the Court was saying was that it was only unlawful because of Brexit - before Brexit it would have been lawful (ask John Major), so presumably after Brexit it will be lawful again. Seem crazy and wholly biased.

[@P0c0man8U]

Agreed, absolutely right!👍

[@SupremeMetalOverlord]

That makes no sense!!!

[@knockitoffhudson3470]

Facts, when are gonna get a ruling that says that labour lied to the people when they said they would Leave the EU just to get into parliament.

[@Jimmie16]

What the court said was that they way in which he got the royal assent was unlawful in that he lied to the queen in order to get it.

[@leecourtney1225]

@@knockitoffhudson3470 you would have to rule against every political party for the last 100 years, literally every party has lied in its manifesto for every election campaign I can remember. This is an entirely different issue an an odd analogy

[@dianeirvine7624]

Total respect for David starkey

[@alexmuir2815]

no respect for this relic from the court of henery the eighth

[@stshar900]

Yes but these Judges favor the EU and Remain.

[@skyblazeeterno]

So you know somehow how they all voted in the referendum? If not you are just talking bs

[@bluepeter3470]

David. I wish you were in parliament A true British man Full of wisdom and truth Look to the north and parts of wales Wait when the general election cames

[@marcusmurphy3640]

And that's why he will never be in parliament because he speaks the TRUTH

[@desfrench825]

Bercow needs to take control of himself if he expects the Mp to behave his raging and ranting at the mps is terrible and the look of hatred on his face when he tells of conservative Mps is absolutely shocking and terrible to see . I think somebody should take a photo of him and send it to him and show him a photo of Boris Johnson of how composed and relaxed he is

[@normanyemm8717]

it might happen. we are getting close to boiling over.

[@alexy8520]

Who's we?

[@johnknow4097]

@@alexy8520 Us but obviously not those that can't think for themselves.

[@alexy8520]

@@johnknow4097 Like Brexiteers? Go on what's Nige told you to think now?

[@AICabal]

@@alexy8520 What have the crazy shadow front bench told you now?

[@johnknow4097]

@@alexy8520 Well considering the EU is an antidemocratic organisation created not with the agreement of the people of Europe but in spite of them some might ask who's telling you what to think.

[@samanthamcphie9520]

Ditch these popular commentators, We need to hear more from wise heads like Starkey. 👍

[@brianquinn6014]

sam 777 I would rather listen to a half brick

[@CrankCase08]

It seems the BBC is keeping him off Question Time these days.

[@heliotropezzz333]

It is for judges of the Supreme Court to interpret the law and the constitution. If there were no limits to a prorogation process, what's to stop the government from proroguing frequently or even permanently to get rid of democratic opposition which would turn us into a dictatorship. There have to be some limits and some justifications. I don't rate Sharkey that much. As a historian, he makes mistakes in his history programmes - elementary errors.

[@brianrobinson7984]

@@heliotropezzz333 Like what? I rate Starkey a lot more than these gits who just take the money and toe the line so maybe you can give me some pointers as to why he isn't all that. Like what elementary errors does he regularly make?

[@anthonymullen6300]

Yes... only listen to people who you happen to agree with.

[@karyne826]

Dr Starkey is a very articulate. He sums up our current situation perfectly. It’s catastrophic.

[@williamaitken4544]

Having read some of his books and seen his documentaries I have total respect for David Starkey as an historian. So it baffles me somewhat, putting it mildly, to hear him take this view of the Supreme Court ruling.

[@karyne826]

Having done the same, I’m not surprised at all .

[@300tawan]

Austerity is for you and not for me, and democracy is for me and not for you now run along and keep paying your taxes.

[@johnenochpowellmbe1294]

You could not have put it better!

[@davidclegg3397]

Taxation=Theft.

[@katyb6979]

That's exactly it. Civil wars start for less.....

[@adammillard7286]

The EU octopus has it’s tentacles into all the institutions and is fully determined to keep Britain within it’s crumbling Empire no matter the cost! AM

[@skyblazeeterno]

Do you have something against octopus?

[@ianhenson724]

Well this is what Nigel has been saying for years now. It is remainers that are not dealing with Leaving the E.U.

[@Ultronmclovin]

If any of those judges voted in the referendum,then there judgement should be void or invalid because it is not impartial 🙄

[@catherinedee981]

The arrogance of the turkeys in parliament is breathtaking. They just dont care what the people have voted for and are quite arrogantly going ahead with what they want and sod the electorate as they dont matter.

[@catherinedee981]

@atlantisbolivia.org I dont see representatives and until they are willing to face the electorate then the name turkeys fits them perfectly.

[@tomhulme1176]

What are we the leave voters prepared to do about it ? If we dont fight for this what will we fight for ?

[@martinr661]

Once people realise that the law will not protect them. In fact that it is against them. Once their property and livelihood is under threat, which it is, but it is not realised by most of the population, people will fight. Until then, and I don't know when that will be, most of the population will sit back, still in relative comfort.

[@skyblazeeterno]

@@martinr661 how exactly is there a threat?

[@van-gabondramblinrose6398]

People will not even fight to protect their children. Grooming gangs, sex traffickers, satanic ritual abuse, indoctrination and brainwashing. Our children are under attack, they are a commodity and the nation stands by wringing its hands. They will never fight.

[@Set-ri6rs]

society ignores Mr Starkey at their peril as he has been on the money for many years now.

[@Unlocktube]

He is an historian, not much use to people who want to know about the unprecedented future. Fairly easy to be right about things that have already happened.

[@brianquinn6014]

Set 1942 The man is a senile cretin

[@Set-ri6rs]

@@Unlocktube "You have to know the past to understand the present." Carl Sagan

[@Unlocktube]

@@Set-ri6rs Present is not future.

[@Set-ri6rs]

@@Unlocktube from what i heard hes not making a prediction of the future, more over hes trying to explain the present circumstances, he has made predictions in the past based on his historical background (that turned out to be right ill add) but this interview was not one of those times as no predictions have been made.

[@rupedo1]

Bring on a general election so we can make our voice heard (again) and rid us of these undemocratic, patronising, arrogant, condescending and vile so called MP's.

[@Kohl423]

I read that a professor of law also stated that the decision to decide this in court was not constitutional and that he was astounded at the judges decision as being without doubt a political one that should never have been made. It merely confirms that the establishment including all of these Remaon biased judges came to a conclusion that was obviously stitched up from the start.

[@williamwimbourne856]

It's a pleasure to see Dr Starkey stepping up the past few week and speaking up for freedom and democracy.

[@mashbury]

David Starkey is spot on as usual..

[@richardpadden]

Not a fan of Dr David Starkey, but he put this so eloquently. And spot on.

[@Tentin.Quarantino]

I'm a simple man. I see David Starkey, I click.

[@khankrum1]

You do not have to be brainy to understand truth and reason!

[@maesy6730]

there is nothing as stupid as an 'intellectual'.

[@yetagain5671]

David's recent spiked interview is aural ecstasy.

[@thomascargill3474]

We should find out what the politics of the eleven crooked judges are , that would be very interesting I'm sure.

[@frankeytwoshoes8187]

And I can see civil unrest coming !!!

[@peterholden9357]

frankey twoshoes - Where? Where.......

[@peterholden9357]

Tiny mod : How about the majority of graduates who go on to become the engineers, the Dr’s, the senior police, civil servants, legal profession, the finance sector, the management of the country. We pay most of the tax and are generally the brains of the outfit.

[@romanbrough]

Someone tell Boris that if he wants to be the Prime minister in 2020 then he has to make a pact with Nigel. Anything else may well put Comrade Corbyn in number 10. Boris needs to show real courage. Will he?

[@1chish]

As the Learned and Right Honourable Attorney General explained in simple language to the thick ones in Parliament: The Supreme Court just created a new law and then retrospectively found BoJo had transgressed it. They did not find anyone 'guilty', they did not find that he lied, they did not find he had misled the Queen or that he had broken any laws (because it didn't exist until their judgment). But despite all that they overrode the Queens Prerogative ... We are in a very troubling place when the Judiciary places itself in the middle of a Parliamentary argument, takes sides and decides the Queen was wrong (even if she had no choice in the matter). Even more dangerous for the Judiciary is if they insist on treading on political ground then politicians will, quite rightly, demand to know the political standings of Judges so treading. And as, again, the Attorney General stated it is perfectly in order to argue against the Judgement, to disagree with the Court. However one should NOT impute Judge's integrity or suggest improper motives.

[@1chish]

@atlantisbolivia.org Crap. This was a civil matter not a criminal matter for a start so there was no 'guilt' attached. And do keep up - There was no law to break before the court MADE THAT LAW! And if you think lawyers have never disagreed with a court ruling then how come these people had a go in Scotland (twice and ended up 1 - 1) had a go in Northern Ireland (and lost 1 - 0) and had a go in England & Wales (and lost 1 - 0) so trundled off to the Supreme Court? BECAUSE THEY BLOODY DISAGREED!

[@joanofarc33]

If people really understood what Starkey is saying they would be in the streets with their gardening tools. They would shut the country down.

[@frankhoffman3566]

I largely agree with Dr. Starkey. I'm from the US with some background in this. To me, the most glaring aspect of the Supreme Court ruling was the lack of discussion of Parliamentary remedies when there is vigorous disagreement with (in this case) prorogation. As I understand it, there may be a confidence vote, there may be a snap election called for. There are other opposition mechanisms. In other governments based upon the English system, if a constitution (whether written or established by tradition) contains stated legislative remedies, judiciaries will decline to act, saying the constitutional remedies for political disagreement with a leader are already stated in the foundational instrument. This seems a rather massive grab at legislative power by the high court. I saw no discussion of available remedies. I saw not an ounce of judicial restraint. I cannot imagine how this decision was made unanimously. This encourages, in the future, no end to running to the court when someone disagrees with the PM. It is a loud precedent when Britain needs to lower the volume.

[@orla556]

Very well put. The remain establishment are using these underhand tactics in order to avoid an upfront honest election. They are holding the government and the electorate hostage whilst taking over the reigns.

[@frankhoffman3566]

@atlantisbolivia.org ...As I stated, I'm not from the UK. I've repeatedly heard from remainers who claim that the 2016 referendum only succeeded because of lies within the campaign statements of the leave side. If so, where is the uprising of people who believe themselves tricked? Now you take the position that the timing of an election can render the entire thing ''dishonest''. Where in history has any free and fair election been conducted where it was deemed dishonest due to its timing? Really, some remain positions are extremely out there.

[@orla556]

@atlantisbolivia.org If the people want No Deal, they shall have No Deal, they will be voting with eyes wide open

[@davidcolley7714]

@@frankhoffman3566 This may come as a shock but the Referendum was advisory. We have a parliamentary government in the UK and only Parliament makes the laws. So to leave the EU parliament has to give its consent which it is willing to do so but only if a deal is made

[@frankhoffman3566]

@@davidcolley7714 Thank you for your condescension. I've observed it's typical of remainers, who have denigrated the intelligence and honesty of everyone 'leave' for 3+ years. I think PARLIAMENT can't go to the people and ask for their help, telling them PARLIAMENT will abide by their decision, and then have PARLIAMENT tell them '' Never mind citizens, you were too stupid and gullible to know what you were doing." What do you think peoples' perception of PARLIAMENT is, when MPs repeatedly vote to avoid an election? Perhaps remainers see it as an accident that 'leave' has increased 5 to 8%, now hovering around 60% of the UK public. Perhaps the people think PARLIAMENT has forgotten who, in a democracy, allows them to serve.

[@doug5101]

I hope the supreme court are watching what is going on in parliament. It's an absolute disgrace. And already they're acting like school children.

[@martynanstis1620]

On the subject of defence from the government, what happened to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?

[@snowyowel7961]

All BORIS is trying to do is Deliver on the Democratic vote of the referendum , BREXITERS are the ones who actually WON the referendum . And should not be made to feel Disenfranchised in their own country .

[@davidtaylor351]

@@snowyowel7961 And that is exactly what is happening!! Brexiteers, like all participants, took their chances, and voted in a legally constituted referendum, sanctioned by Parliament!! - They happened to win!! And because of that, they are being vilified, held hostage, and, so far, denied the fruits of their victory!! This is pure evil!! Clearly, there are forces at work, who, are quite prepared to wreck the basis and integrity, (what was left of it, anyway!), of British politics, in order to impose their will! And they live under the mind bogglingly stupid delusion!!, that, somehow, if they get away with it! All will be well!! And then we have this latest development! Why should anybody accept a 'political' court decision as being valid? When the entrenched political class, doesn't appear to want to accept the result of a referendum, as being valid!!?

[@snowyowel7961]

@@davidtaylor351 I agree and because they refuse to accept the result of the referendum the tax payers are having to pay a billion pounds a month to the EU , The EU who have private planes chauffeur driven car champagne lunches ex ex, Then we get told there isn't enough money for our resources ,

[@kneedeacon2309]

Mr Starkeys thank you for speaking for millions of those like me who had no voice, only the vote.

[@stewartsavage1123]

And a Blatant symbolic spider on her shoulder

[@dannyboywhaa3146]

Starkey - such a legend! I don’t hear from him nearly enough... they’re trying to silence him!

[@GUnit40W]

I am not asking much, just David Starkey for Prime Minister. Just one term and I will be happy!

[@geoffjoffy]

I love Dr David Starkey. Please have him on LBC MORE OFTEN.

[@goldenboyproductions2740]

Yeah he should have his own show. How about every weekday 10-1?

[@williamaitken4544]

He should replace vacuous windbag Farage.

[@adig7569]

Time for talk is over! Time to storm the gates of parliament! Enough is enough!

[@pickleonions4277]

This must not just be gotten through and forgotten the British people deserve more there has to be a day of reckoning for these vandals that have torn away all our democratic and moral standards and the EU must bear some of the blame for pushing treaties onto European people and not allowing them the legitimate right to reject them, taking away the democratic standards painfully built up over hundred of years and totally disregarding the Hope's and aspirations of ordinary people. The politicians who signed away the people's sovereignty without their permission and behind their backs have to be brought to task for their criminal actions

[@P0c0man8U]

Also can anyone name the law he broke?

[@kesfitzgerald1084]

In that one ruling, the Supreme Court appointed itself Sovereign.

[@susancronk8512]

It made itself a puppet shadow mini parliament. How can you enforce an unwritten constitutional law challenge? Courts are to enforce written laws, not precedents. When the political speeches began during what were to be legal arguments, the court had a responsibility to quash it and insist on the facts not political statements. The left having none, the matter could have wrapped up the same day it began.

[@kesfitzgerald1084]

@@susancronk8512 well said.

[@Tentin.Quarantino]

MPs have to declare their income to counter bribery. Will the Supreme Court have to start doing that now, since they’ve just made themselves a political power?

[@andrewmorris9586]

dr david starkey is brilliant,enjoyed his rare appearances on question time,but of course he no longer gets on because he actually has real views,based on his intellect and knowledge

[@bmarkyt132]

Dr Starkey spot on as usual. Alexander Mercouris from The Duran says exactly this too.

[@mazza4190]

Minority Report. I never thought you could be judged on the thought. When the action is within the parameters of the law. Throw in the games played in the last 3 years and suddenly intention is guilt. Get May before the Court. In fact lets get Parliaments MP's lined up one at a time for investigations. Time to set the law dogs loose on Westminster.

[@johnnyretro1975]

spot on david

[@m77ast]

War did I hear you say. I think the remainers do not yet understand that.

[@truecrimewithglenclark9098]

We have choices people. Guy fawkes is coming up soon.

[@kateroyston9416]

If Blair as PM created the supreme court,couldn't Boris as PM scrap it?

[@TheZetec63]

Yep. Gets my vote.

[@spongthe1st]

In theory, yes, there's nothing parliament can do that parliament cannot undo, that said, Blair had a massive majority to vote it through and Boris would need similar, which would only occur if there's another election and if he gets a big majority

[@kateroyston9416]

@@spongthe1st I see what you mean,cheers

[@aldohume64]

An election would fix this mess. Democracy anyone?

[@frazerduncan356]

The MP's are a disgrace

[@JohnDoe-yy4xk]

Point of personal privilage.. Point of personal privilage.. Democracy was gone the day society gave power to the individual and not the collective.. In case their feelings get hurt... We dont want to hurt anybodys feelings even it kills everyone else.. Do we....?????

[@northnsouth6813]

I wish David would stand as an MP and bring back intelligence back into Parliament instead of half the thick bunch we have at present.

[@keithsymons5708]

They are not thick they are deceitful ?

[@peterholden9357]

Derek Bainbridge : And when he does something you don’t like, undoubtedly he will become a traitor as well.

[@northnsouth6813]

Peter Holden I didn't say traitor I was talking about his intelligence and his logic in debate.

[@jays2877]

I know that Dr Starkey isn't a lawyer but when someone of his stature points out the ramifications of the SC's ruling we ought to be alarmed. From now on a few people who don't like a political decision can have the courts decide - and if the SC is the highest court and is somehow linked to the EU what chance impartiality?

[@Delmothop]

BUT PROROGATION WAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BREXIT?!?!??

[@johnruan]

the courts have no right to but in.

[@johnruan]

@atlantisbolivia.org no its not wheres the crime?

[@gefparx6442]

Seventeen plus million VOTERS chomping at the bit ? .

[@tamasmarcuis4455]

Starkey repeats again and again " England " or " English ". This was a matter of fundamental Scots Law , that no one, monarch or prime minister, is immune from the law. The Conservative UK government was taken to court in Scotland and refused to provide any reason for their actions. They simple believed that they were above and not answerable to the court. It is that which so angers Starkey. He to believes that the rule of the UK is a matter ONLY for England and Scots Law should be disregarded as worthless. If as seems possible the UK government tries to put into UK law that the crown and by extension the government is not answerable to the Scottish Law it will be a matter so great that it could lead to a Unilateral Declaration of Independence. Perhaps then Starkey would understand why the Scots lawyer was so animated and passionate. He was defending the fundamental pillar of Scot Law.

[@markthompson6540]

I'm very worried that the house of lords is behind this.

[@susancronk8512]

Do you believe they influenced the court? If it were so, their ruling would be voided and they would face charges of judicial misconduct.

[@markthompson6540]

@@susancronk8512 I believe they did yes. Can I prove it no

[@richardstuart325]

So the government defence was incompetent. Maybe they were trying to lose the case?

[@thedoubleoutoftrouble]

There’s an elephant in the room nobody knows.margot James is a remainer because she has a vineyard apparently and no doubt other investments abroad no doubt. In fact every remainer in parliament has investments in Europe. Rivers of blood speech becomes more valid everyday .

[@Freespeech141]

The pomposity is staggering! UK going backwards!

[@alangaillard2988]

Dr Starkey is right; there is no going back.

[@goldenboyproductions2740]

Love Dr Starkey, I'd follow him into the gates of hell

[@SMX815]

David Starkey is spot on & he makes it abundantly clear the remain have laws on their side! The clear fact that Brexit hangs on by the skin of its teeth & how we move from here is anyone’s guess? Brexit means Brexit!

[@unrepentantpepe]

17.4 NEVER SURRENDER 🇬🇧

[@QED_]

How could the experienced English High Court rule for prorogation . . . but the Supreme Court vote UNANIMOUSLY against it (?) Where's the precedent (?)

[@fendercali]

Did he say “this is not how we do law in England” with regards to a ruling from the UK, that’s the UK, Supreme Court?? That court is not there for ENGLAND Dorothy!!

[@sledge1960]

This could end in bloodshed. At least freedom is worth dying for.

[@stephenlitten1789]

Starkey may be right, but he is probably wrong: the man is an historian not a lawyer. 11 of 11 UKSC judges arrived at the same decision. The major problem is Johnson has a minority coalition government - his coalition is in the minority. Therefore anything he and his government try is going to be challenged by the majority. He has not done the decent thing of offering his resignation to the monarch so that either parliament finds a leader capable of leading a majority coalition or an election is called. But basically the Supreme Court has found in favour of the principle that the majority can run roughshod over the minority, not the other way around. How Parliament normally operates. Anybody who hasn't realised this is having a severe case of the the thicks. Or is called Boris Johnson.

[@robertbutler2481]

These judges had no business interfering in pure politics

[@michaelbell5984]

What a load of rubbish. The judges were protecting parliament and democracy. If they had not ruled that it was unlawful then any PM in the future could prorogue parliament at will. It is normally prorogued only when it is impractical. I.e. conference season. Johnson lied about the reason to the Queen in addition.

[@maralvor]

The Supreme Court allowing a comment about “The mother of Parliament and the Father of lies” to pass apparently unchecked or remarked upon in some way is certainly not in my legal experience something which is ever normally allowed by the Courts and would usually be deprecated and might even be asked to be withdrawn. No evidence was led to substantiate this statement to my knowledge.Such a remark made in the House would almost certainly be challenged by the Speaker and asked to be withdrawn. One might be inclined to expect higher standards in the Supreme Court. Justice has to be seen to be done on all fronts and such a comment not being challenged by even one of the 11 judges is very surprising and puzzling! They are of course entirely objective and unbiased.

[@samhanrahan1874]

Get rid of the supreme court its not fit for purpose

[@scottishbombolini7794]

Privileged David Starkey's just a common bloke who is down to Earth and those nasty Judges should listen to his evangelical words of wisdom, indeed we rebel Scots must be mad not to see the humility in his humble and gentile Englishness.

[@anitarabar6291]

.... Where drums beat , laws are silent ~ time for rebellion .....

[@davidhollinghurst2115]

Methinks it's maybe time for the UK to look at dissolving the Union and let England have our own parliament and written constitution.

[@felixulatsov8515]

Only the English parliament can dissolve the UK you numpty

[@davidhollinghurst2115]

@@felixulatsov8515 that's what I'm saying .There is no English Parliament.

[@Meltingice444]

Starkey the knowledge

[@mikeoneill8665]

As you say Dr. Starkey, settled by war.

[@stellawilliamson4239]

If it was a convention changed by this ruling into law, the it is a law that can only apply to future prorogations.

[@joshuaharper3036]

What does the 'establishment not accepting the result' have to do with the supreme court decision? The government said this WASN'T about Brexit but about a Queen's Speech for its domestic agenda. So...?

[@peterholden9357]

Josh Harper - Spot on mate. The hypocrisy of the leavers made clear for all to see.

[@orla556]

Because the supreme court itself raised the issue of scrutiny over Brexit.

[@HelenThomasCreativeHealer]

In law the burden of proof is on the opposition. In this case, there was no proof that the PM lied, only suspicion So why was he found guilty?

[@adezentje5230]

so now you can sue the opposition for slowing down the government to break with the EU ?

[@jamesvaughan8711]

Drain the swamp

[@arthurfnshelby4335]

Maybe if Boris had not shut down Parliament none of this would have happened.

[@gjingodjango]

Who needs judges? We should all just ask Mr Starkey, he seems to know everything.

[@gjingodjango]

What he says in this interview is utter utter rubbish. The judges did not slap Boris down for lying and their judgment withholds how our constitution works. These kinds of utterances are designed to confuse the gullible. You by the sounds of it.

[@blakeshannon9800]

I DETEST ADs!! They are intrusive!!

[@DarthQueefious]

Used to see Dr. Starkey on the BBC all the time. Not so much anymore....

[@raymondcollinson7242]

In effect, the Supreme Court Judges created a Law where there was no previous law - not even a precedent.

[@pinchermartyn3959]

Thank you David Starkey.

[@maesy6730]

Like him or loath him, but the way tommy robinson was treated by the justice system made me sit up and ponder...now im convinced, nothing blind about our justice system.

[@felixulatsov8515]

Yaxley is a simple egoistic thug qed

[@vulpis_foraminis]

We don’t have a written constitution . So what Constitution are the judges actually basing their opinion on. It should of gone back to the house of Parliament in the been judged there .

[@bobpage6597]

If Brexit is stopped and overturned, I'll leave the UK! I hold tri-citizenship so can move to two other nations of my choosing if democracy dies here at home! I voted to leave, and dammit if that vote isn't respected democracy in the UK is dead. Its gone. No matter how you cut the cake.

[@peterholden9357]

Bob Page : HaHaHa, you voted to stop freedom of movement for everyone else, but retained the right for yourself. Only in Brexitworld!

[@dixienormous8559]

@@peterholden9357 Hey bellend, did he say he was going to Europe? Other countries exist, and if they wish to allow Bob in, then that is their business and none of yours, thicko.

[@dixienormous8559]

No need to leave. We will have a general strike if we are not out on Oct 31st. Hit them where it hurts, in the pocket.

[@bobpage6597]

@@dixienormous8559 Correct Dixie, and you are right. It is not a European country I would be going to. At least someone has sense :)

[@philwhitelaw3111]

To me this ruling opens the door for whoever has the deepest pockets and greatest influence over the judiciary to get their own way whenever a government makes a decision that does not meet their narrative.

[@seanwalsh3977]

Multi-millionaire Boris Johnson, multi-millionaire Nigel Farage, multi-millionaire Jacob Rees-Mogg. Men of the people. Just ordinary guys with only your best interests at heart.

[@SM-cz5od]

Gina Miller multimillionaire with only our best interests at heart??

[@TheZetec63]

Millionaire jeremy corbyn, hilary benn, ed Miliband, tony blair. Etc etc.

[@seanwalsh3977]

@@SM-cz5od actually yes!

[@seanwalsh3977]

@@TheZetec63 Corbyn's a millionaire??? Who knew?

[@davidcolley7714]

@@TheZetec63 jeremy corbyn, hilary benn, ed Miliband, millionaires. You having a laugh?