Joe Biden's past catches up with him

Before Joe Biden decides whether he really really wants to run for president he will have to take into account that we are now in a totally differet social era since the last time he had a go. No man, whether he is running for president, governor, senator, congressman or mayor needs to wrack his brains to see if he can remember anything in his past which involved an unwise kiss or a very unwise slap on the bottom or an even unwiser sexual remark/act with a woman. This is the era post-Harvey Weinstein when stuff is coming out of the woodwork like dry rot. It is staggering the number of men who have been exposed as sexual predators at worst or as sexual liberty-takers. Joe Biden now seems to have fallen into the latter category although his spokesman has denied it. A woman has suddenly remembered that on some occasion in 2014, Biden had made her feel uncomfortable. Lucy Flores, Democratic nominee for lieutenant-governor in Nevada in 2014, remembers she recoiled when Biden planted a long slow kiss on the back of her head. From the same event, Biden was photographed burying his nose in the hair of an actress. Neither incident is damning or disgusting or overwhelmingly sexual in nature by the sound of it. But looking back now in 2019, both incidents seem inappropriate, somewhat creepy and definitely overstepping the mark - if true. And are there numerous other examples waiting to be made public? Will dozens of women now come forward with uncomfortable recollections. It is more than likely. Biden hasn't even declared he will run yet but he must surely be having second thoughts. The extraordinary thing is that when much more salacious stuff came out about Trump, he just brushed it aside and survived. But Biden is a different character altogether. He wants to be seen as a nice guy, a gentleman. But creepy stuff from five years ago could chage all that.

Theresa May's last last chance has gone

With absolute predictability Theresa May's bizarre attempt to persuade MPs to vote for half of her deal, leaving the second half for some future date has failed. So now the May deal has failed failed failed. Three times. The EU has thrown up its collective hands in despair and has decided that a no-deal Brexit is now the only way forward. Can that really be true? Are we going to crash out of the EU with no deal because MPs cannot, will not, refuse even to contemplate the May deal as it stands. Even those voting for it seem to hate it. So apart from crashing out on April 12 without any deal whatsoever, the only other alternative it seems is to extend Brexit almost for ever while Parliament spends months exhausting all other options although most MPs apart from the rabid Brexiteers are looking for a soft exit which means staying in the EU customs union and single market, and thus prevent the UK from seeking trade deals outside the EU. Just like old times. Why on earth go for this option when the obvious alternative is just to stay in the EU? By throwing out May's deal for a third time there can't be a fourth or fifth attempt. May should announce from Downing Street that her Brexit deal is now dead, it is no more, it is defunct, dead as a dead parrot, no longer breathing. Then she should either give up and hand over to someone else or do what she promised she would never do which is to stay in the EU for at least another year or two which would mean the UK taking part in the upcoming European parliament election. What a farce that would be. I reckon that's what's going to happen. The UK will NOT leave the EU by May 22 but will agree to suspend Article 50 or as long as posible, take part in the European elections and carry on the bitching in Parliament ad infinitum. What a fine prospect that will be. It is quite clear that after nearly three years, the job of actually leaving the EU is impossible. It can't be done. The EU bureaucrats have been brilliant. They realised that if the UK found it difficult to leave with a consensus then none of the other 27 members would even try to do the same. It can't be done. It's a club which has strict entry rules and closed exit doors. WE ARE STUCK!!!

New gray warfare threat

Fifteen days after the 9/11 al-Qaeda terrorist attacks in the US in 2001, a small team of CIA intelligence and paramilitary officers arrived in the Panjshir Valley in north central Afghanistan for what was to be one of the most successful covert unconventional missions in America's history. Led by veteran CIA officer Gary Schroen, the team which included a young Farsi-speaking operations officer, a former US Marine who always wore a corduroy sports coat and an ex-Seal commando, linked up with the 15,000-strong irregular indigenous force, the Northern Alliance, and began the rout of the Taliban. They were joined three weeks later on October 17 by the first batch of 350 American special forces troops. By December 6, the Taliban had been toppled although the prize target, Osama bin Laden, escaped. This was officially termed "hybrid warfare" by the Pentagon, a non-conventional, covert attack backed by conventional air power. In the intervening years, America's adversaries have developed a new version of hybrid war known in the Pentagon as "gray warfare", acts of undeclared aggression involving a combination of subversive military action along with cyber attacks, disinformation, and political interference. The Pentagon has been forced to develop new capabilities to counter gray warfare now being orchestrated with growing sophistication by Russia, China and Iran: Russia in Ukraine, the Baltics and Balkans and western elections, China in the South China Sea and Iran throughout the Middle East. Last week Steven Walker, head of the Pentagon's Research agency, Darpa, stressed the importance of developing ways to counter this insidious form of warfare. With the Pentagon's strategy now focusing on trying to keep ahead of Russia and China in a big-power arms race, funding for countering gray warfare has to compete with key research projects such as hypersonic weapon systems. One of the challenges is in defining gray warfare. Unlike Operation Jawbreaker, the CIA-led post-9/11 mission in Afghanistan, which was completed in less than three months and was viewed as a legitimate response to 9/11, the activities launched by Russia, China and Iran are long-term and more subtle. "We need technologies and processes that can handle grey-zone activities which are not openly declared or defined," Fotis Barlos, programme manager in Darpa's strategic technology office, told me. Using artificial intelligence technologies, game theory and modelling in a programme codenamed Compass, he and his team work out what an adversary's intentions are and how they might respond if the US were to take specific action to counter their aggression. Russia, China and Iran play the gray warfare game with what has been described by senior US special operations commanders as a "finely-tuned risk calculus", expanding their sphere of influence aggressively but remaining wary of provoking a US or allied military response. "Gray zone warfare is illegitimate and involves military and other capabilities that are not claimed (by the perpetrators) but avoid tripping over the threshold that could lead to confrontation (with the West)," Kathleen Hicks, a former senior Pentagon official, said.

Trump should move forward and forget witchhunt obsession

Donald Trump is understandably enjoying his triumph arising from the Robert Mueller report into no collusion with the Ruskies. But he is threatening revenge against the people who put him, the president of the United States, into a position where his integrity and honesty and patriotism were all called into question. This sort of thing should never be allowed to happen to the president, he said. Any president, not just him. Well that's a debating point but he now seems determined to launch into his own witchhunt to track down those who dared to speak out against him. And journalists are on his revenge list because he claims America's major newspapers and broadcasters, particularly The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC were guilty of appalling opinionated baseless journalism. Well, with hindsight of course many of the stories that have been published over the last two years have proven to lack proper evidence. But that's hardly the fault of the journalists. They were doing their professional job tryng to make sense of all the allegations flying around, many of which emanated from aides close to Trump who gave their versions of events to the Mueller team. Some of the most dramatic stuff came from Michael Cohen, Trump's former personal lawyer, who made very damaging claims in public. What were newspapers supposed to do? Ignore the Cohen allegations? Trump hates most newspapers and abhors CNN but they were doing the best they could to unravel the Russian collusion affair. The most salacious stuff of all came from the dossier drawn up by Christopher Steele, the former British MI6 spy once based in Moscow, including the Golden Shower allegation in which Trump, before he became president, was said to have been compromised by the Russians by being caught with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room. Ok, if that stuff was all baloney, a bit of back propaganda fed to Steele by his Russian contacts, I sympathise with Trump. It was an outrageous accusation and if total rubbish it should never have seen the light of day. There will always be doubts in people's mind but Mueller took the Steele dossier into account and, judging by the summary of his report, he clearly did not believe that the Russians had blackmail material against Trump. Despite his urge for revenge, Trump should take the gift handed to him by Mueller and move on. He has already received a mass of positive headlines since Mueller's investigation cleared him of collusion with the Russians. None of his supporters believed it from day one. So, grab your moment by all means, Mr President, but it's time to show the world that you want to achieve some good during your presidency. Otherwise all those Democratic rivals will be head-to-head with you in 2020. I'm not taking sides here. I'm just saying it's time for witchhunts to be cast aside.

Big decision time on Brexit is fast approaching

At the moment there is bedlam in the House of Commons with more Brexit ideas than sense floating around. The so-called indicative votes coming up could mean a Norway-style Brexit, a Canada-style Brexit, a softly soft Brexit, a people's vote or for all I know a combination of all of the above. But Theresa May will have none of it. She doesn't believe that any of these alternatives to her Brexit deal would honour either the 2016 referendum vote or the Tory Party manifesto which was put before the people in her disastrous snap election in 2017. She is determined not to allow a soft Brexit, not to allow a no-deal Brexit and definitely not to allow a no-Brexit-at-all Brexit. What she does believe in, wait for it......is HER Brexit deal which she took more than two years to negotiate with our EU "partners" which is neither soft nor hard but somewhere in the middle. This has been her mantra since Day One, and she's not going to change her view just because a posh Tory MP and former minister Sir Oliver Letwin has succeeded in persuading a majority of MPs to vote for his proposal - looking at all the other options for leaving the EU. All her critics are saying Theresa May is putting her party before the country. But this is a little unfair. After all if she didn't take into account the rabidly right-wing element in the Tory Party she could never get anything done for her country because they would just vote it down and bring the sledgehammer 10-member Northern Ireland Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) with them. Without their votes, she loses, the country loses. Ergo, she has to try and win over the Brexiteers who would desperately love to have a no-deal Brexit but fear a soft Brexit so much they might even suport Theresa May after all. Well, the elegant Etonian Jacob Rees-Mogg, of the so-called European Research Group of 60 Tory Brexiteers, has now indicated he might go over to Theresa's side because if Sir Oliver Letwin's intervention leads to a soft Brexit deal - ie staying as close to the EU as legally possible without actually beng a member anymore - all his campaigning and broadcasting will have been for nought. This is what Theresa May is counting on: making the alternatives look so awful for the Brexiteers that they will side with a prime minister they can't stand and a deal they hate. Now that sounds very weird but it's what's called Real Politik. The worst possible solution would be the one Downing Street is now whispering about, a snap election. That would achieve absolutely zilch except more chaos, more delay and probably a Labour government. I think the snap election whisper is just another blackmail component to force the Brexiteers to play ball. Even at this late stage it might work. Provided the DUP ladies and gentlemen come on board too, Theresa May could still be saved by the ERG, and then and only then will she able to shout down her critics and claim she did it all for Queen and country.

Trump "exonerated" over Ruskie affair

The news overnight about Donald Trump getting the green light after Robert Mueller's two-year investigation into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and the Ruskies will probably have one rather significant consequence. I may have to revise my prediction that Trump will fail to win a second term and Kamala Harris will win the Democratic nomination and thus the White House in 2020! The "exoneration" over collusion - not really a surprise - and the announcement by William Barr, the big bloke attorney general, that the president will not face charges for obstruction of justice (over the sacking of James Comey, former FBI director), will give a huge boost to Trump's chances of reelection. Mind you, he would have just shrugged off a Mueller report claiming there WAS evidence of collusion, but it would still have given ammunition to the Democratic Party to batter Trump all the way to the 2020 election. Now all they can hope for is a different sort of finding by the Democrat-run House of Representatives committees pursuing their own investigations. But, again, if they find against Trump, he will just point to the Mueller reort and say the Democrats are all poor losers. Or just losers!! Now, with Mueller effectively backing Trump's claim that there never was any collusion with the Ruskies, the president will go singing and dancing towards a second term. Provided the economy doesn't go into recession - a small chance - or there is some huge domestic disaster or a war with North Korea or Iran, or he does something so outrageous the whole world will erupt, then Trump will win a second term. So, sorry Kamala Harris and all the others lining up for the White House from the Democratic Party, from today your challenge has dropped down the scale by such a huge amount you might as well give up now. Joe Biden, forget it, stay at home and enjoy your family. The Washington Post keeps a tally of the number of lies Trump has told since taking office but it doesn't seem to matter. His supporters believe him, and now after the Mueller report they will believe him even more if that's possible. Unless of course there is some small print in the Mueller report which will never see the light of day until it gets leaked to the New York Times which paints a different picture from the rapid summary provided by Big Bloke Barr. Incidentally why on earth did Barr have to write a summary of the Mueller conclusions? Why didn't Mueller start his report off with a full summary of his conclusions? It's definitely a good week for Trump and he will milk it to death.

A cabinet of disloyalty and treachery

If there is one thing this country needs right now it's a united cabinet talking and singing with one voice to show us voters that the prime minister and all her closest collagues are of one mind and in charge. But no, they're all bitching about Theresa May, putting out rumours about her state of health, whispering to their favourite political journalists about coups and leadership battles. So well done members of the cabinet. You are probably the most disloyal bunch of self-serving backbiting cabinet ministers since the dark days of the end of Maggie Thatcher's era when her most senior colleagues plotted her downfall while she was away at a conference in Paris. The Sunday papers are full of coup rumours, quoting different members of the cabinet, anonymously of course, some of whom are pushing for Theresa to be replaced by the very boring-looking David Lidington, her deputy, and others claiming Michael Gove, Environment Secretary, is being set up to take over. For heaven's sake now is not the time to change the prime minister, or the government. Now is the time in the final two weeks left to come up with a solution - May's Brexit deal or something else - which Parliament will approve before we all get thrown into a disastrous pit of gloom and uncertainty. Whether you like Theresa May or not, nothing is going to be served by having a Downing Street coup and a new face trotting back and forth between London and Brussels. Neither Lidington nor Gove inspire confidence and why would the EU react more favourably to either of these two gentlemen than they have so far with Theresa May? Lidington has already come out in support of May, so that has killed one rumour. Well, sort of. As for Gove, he has made a point of supporting the prime minister in public statements but by now we know quite a lot about Michael Gove. He wanted to be Tory leader before when Theresa May was in the frame for the job (and won) and wonderfully stabbed Boris Johnson in the back, and front, to make sure that he, Gove, and not Johnson, should be regarded as the potential leader. He said something like, "I supported Boris initially but I now don't think he's up to the job". Brilliant stuff. A Shakespearian act of treachery. In my view he should remain as Environment Secretary and concentrate on fisheries, piggeries and wind farms. Theresa is unquestionably suffering from Brexititis, a potentially lethal disease which can eventually drive you mad. But I don't think she is yet ready for the funny farm. She must see this through to the very end and get a deal, whatever kind, through Parliament. She deserves to have her stamp on the deal. So go away all you coup plotters and show a bit of respect and loyalty. Otherwise, resign!!

Theresa May's time is running out - again

Theresa May could not be in a tighter spot. She now has deadlines that will impact not just on her Brexit deal but on her role as prime minister, her future, our future, the EU's future. The arithmatic is totally against her. She still seems to believe that she will get her Brexit deal passed by the House of Commons at the third time of asking. Why does she think that? Her defeat if she does have another go next week will not be so catastrophic as the first and second attempts but she will still be defeated because there is no way 149 MPs who voted against her the second time are going to throw in the towel and vote for her this time. It is inconceivable that there could be such a change-around, even appreciating the intense blackmail pressure that will be on each MP to sign up to the deal which a lot of people claim is terrible. Theresa now has two deadlines: get her deal approved between now and April 12, and if she does then she will have until May 22 to get it through the necessary legislation. But if she fails in the next two weeks to get her deal passed, she will have to come up with an alternative or alternatives sufficiently of interest to the 27 EU nations or face crashing out without a deal. But she has shown no interest in anything other than her deal. She doesn't want to even listen to Jeremy Corbyn's whimperngs about staying in the customs union and single market. And she dismisses out of hand revoking Article 50, thus scrapping Brexit altogether, despite the fact that there is now a petition running on the parliamentary website calling for just that - an end to Brexit - which has so far attracted more than 2.4 million signatures, including mine. If she puts her deal to the vote next week which would seem to me to be suicidal, and loses, there will be a huge momentum for her to resign and hand over the deadly chalice to some other poor sucker. What good that would do, heaven knows. Theresa is also totally against a second referendum, and presumably knows that a general election would be a disaster for the Tories. So no one wants that. I think there is a very good chance that our prime minister will literally barricade heself inside Number Ten Downing Street and refuse to let anyone else in. The only possible option is now being canvassed around Westminster which is to put half a dozen or so possible alternatives to Parliament which the MPs could vote on, including having a second referendum or revoking Article 50. But can you imagine the complexities of doing that and the sheer chaos that will cause in the House of Commons, with MPs not knowing which way to turn?

Theresa May finally gets emotional

Theresa May has been tossing out the same old phrases about Brexit ever since it all started nearly three years ago. It never looked as if she had any passion either in her chosen words or the way she looked and behaved. She just trotted out well-worn phrases about her deal being the only deal and the importance of getting her deal approved by Parliament to avoid all the other worse options. But yesterday she finally cracked and in the process blew it. She did what so many leaders in other parts of the world have done, including and especially Donald Trump. She appealed to the people over the heads of MPs, hoping that voters would come rushing to her side and order their MPs to do as the headmistress wanted them to do and go for her deal. But it was a dangerous and risky move and looks like it has seriously backfired. Basically she said it was all Parliament's fault that we are now in this Brexit mess - which is certainly partly true. But every MP has an ego and none of them will like being told they are naughty boys and girls and deserve to be spanked. Especially the Labour lot, most of whom blame Theresa May and Theresa May alone for the crisis this country is now facing. She had too many red lines which she refused to budge from, they have been saying for months. Now her address from Number Ten has fatally screwed up her chances of persuading any Labour MPs to vote for her which is crucial if she is ever to get her wretched deal approved. Even the well-behaved MPs will now act like spoilt children having been scolded by their nanny. They won't vote for Theresa, oh no, not next week, nor the week after nor ever. Theresa gambled and lost. But at least she showed some fire. A bit more emotion a long time back might have made all the difference. But now turning on MPs, the very ones she needs on her side, was a grave error.

No deal Brexit now short-odds favourite

Both Theresa May and the EU are now engaged in blackmail. Theresa says to all MPs, "You have until June 30 to sign up to my Brexit deal whether you like or not," and the EU in the form of Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, says, "You can only have until June 30 if you agree the Brexit deal." My immediate instinct is that the hard-core Brexiteers will respond to that by continuing to screw everything up in Parliament so that the UK will leave on June 30 without a deal of any kind. This is what they truly want. Assuming the EU is not going to budge on the deal itself, just play around the edges - the Irish edges - there is no point in having three more months unless the Brexiteers who basically hate Theresa's deal totally change their minds. Why would they do that? And by the way they cetainly don't want what Jeremy Corbyn, alleged Labour leader, is going around proposing which is the softest Brexit on paper, continuing with full membership of the EU customs union and single market. So no-deal Brexit is approaching fast and furious, even though the majority of MPs voted against it. But, for some reason I don't quite understand, that vote was not legally binding. It was just an expression of what most MPs did not want. Whatever happens now, the UK WILL leave on June 30. There will be no more delays. The EU will not stand for it, the UK voters will not stand for it, and the Brexiteers will definitely not stand for it. There is no better deal in the wings ready to be adopted in place of Theresa's hard-fought agreement. Unless of course she resigns, the Tory Party implodes, there is a general election and Jeremy Corbyn enters 10 Downing Street as prime minister. None of this can happen in just three months but even if it could I would rather a no-deal Brexit any day!

It could only happen in Britain

Basing the future of our country on a parliamentary convention drawn up in 1604 when King James I was our monarch pretty much sums up the unbelievably ridiculous state of affairs we are now in, with just ten days left before what used to be called Brexit Deadline Day on March 29 but probably isn't anymore. Speaker of the House John Bercow, a short man with a tousle of grey/white hair, a voice like a roaring goat and an ego the size of Big Ben, has pronounced that he has checked with Erskine May - the Bible of UK Parliament rules - and Theresa May cannot ask MPs to vote for a third time on her Brexit deal unless it looks substantially diferent. Otherwise, according to Erskine May, it would be a waste of MPs' time. A waste of time ten days before March 29??? What universe is he living in? And the way he pronounced it! With all the relish of the evil Fagin in Oliver Twist. Bercow of course is a Remainer and doesn't want good old Blighty to leave the EU, so this was a masterful device to put the Theresa May government fair and square in a political cul-de-sac with nowhere to go. The 1604 rule goes back way before Thomas Erskine May, 1st Baron Farnborough, constitutional expert and Clerk of the Commons was around. He wasn't born until 1815. But when he wrote his mighty tome about parliamentary rules and guidelines, he included the 1604 precedent and thus it became gospel to be followed by all future Speakers. Theresa May and her advisers knew all about the 1604 ruling and must have guessed that Bercow would bring it up. Yet Downing Street apeared to be astonished and shocked and surprised when he did so yesterday afternoon. Actually May's Brexit deal didn't look substantially different the SECOND time it was put forward to the vote. There were some minor changes about the legal standing of the Irish backstop but otherwise it was substantially the same as the first time it was presented to Parliament when May was defeated by 230 votes. But Bercow didn't intervene then. No he waited and waited and waited and then pounced at the worst possible moment for Theresa, as she was seriously considering trying out her deal for a third time hoping to persuade enough MPs to join her because of the fast-approaching deadline. Perhaps blackmail doesn't get a mention in Erskine May. Anyway the result is that Bercow rules the roost. He will go down in history as the man who brought the government down or made a no-deal Brexit more likely or who saved the country from disaster. Which one of these it will be, we will get to find out in the next few days, or weeks, or months, or years!!

Theresa May's biggest week yet

Here are all the worst cliches I can muster about the latest Brexit drama: "It's Theresa May's make-or-break week", "Last-ditch crisis talks with DUP", "Boris Johnson says there is another way", "Hard core Brexiteers to fight to the finish", "Britain is doomed", "Donald Tusk says he is open to extend Article 50 to 2052". The last one isn't a cliche and not true but roughly approximates to the president of the European Council's cunning plan to put off Brexit for so long it will make sure it never happens and the UK will be forced to keep signing the cheques for ever. I don't know how Theresa has the will power to get up every morning. She must dream about Brexit and the DUP and Jacob Rees-Mogg, all rolled into one. Is Brexit on her lips as soon as she sips her first taste of coffee in the morning? Does she have time to do anything else? Who is actually running the country? I suppose it has to be Sir Mark Sidwell, cabinet secretary and national security adviser. But then he's all wrapped up in Bexit as well. So, looking at all the newspaper-style headline cliches above, this has got to be the week of all weeks, unless of course next week is the week of all weeks. Either way, we, the people of this beloved country will discover whether our elected parliamentary representatives have the courage, wisdom, foresight and intelligence to decide our future. I'm not sure it has anything to do with Theresa any more. Her deal really hasn't changed snce she first presented it but MPs have to get clear in their heads whether they want to prolong the agony for several more months, or years, or whether they succumb to Theresa's blackmal and sign up to her much-hated deal. I doubt most MPs, let alone voters, remember what the deal contains anymore, other than the wretched Irish backstop arrangement. Will it really allow us to negotiate trade deals with anyone we want or is the small print so dense that we will still have to ask the EU's permission? No doubt Theresa and her negotiators will deny this but I have become so lost in the twists and turns I am no longer sure what sort of new-found freedom we will have by leaving the EU. Does anyone really know? Whatever the situation, this week is going to be crucial - there goes another obvious cliche. Or as the BBC would say: "One thing is certain, no one knows what is going to happen."

Should Theresa May resign and leave the stage?

Many politicians of different persuasions in the UK are now saying that whatever happens with Brexit, Theresa May should go. Well actually I disagree. Let the poor woman see this to the end and if she gets her deal eventually approved by Parliament let her carry on and get it sorted out and onto the next stage, negotiating a trade relationship with the EU. No one else in the Tory government has worked harder than her to get a deal and she should be allowed to pursue it at the helm to the final lap. And who on earth is there anyway who will do a better job? Who is waiting in the wings to be a better, more inspiring leader? No one in my view. No one. Someone on the TV last night, when asked this very question, said it should be someone who voted to leave the EU in the first place and nominated Dominic Raab. I know little about him. What I do know doesn't inspire me. He resigned as Brexit Secretary because he didn't like the way it was going. Well, please, he should have stayed and fought it like a man instead of giving up. So I don't want a loser to replace Theresa May. Ever. As for the rest on the potential list of candidates, Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, Amder Rudd, Sajid Javid, etc etc no no absolutely no!! So Theresa May, for all your faults, your lack of charisma, your obsession with certain words like "we must ensure", your inability to change the same old message, your obstinacy (not always a bad thing), your difficulty actually talking like a human being to your cabinet colleagues, and your failure to draw in views from all political parties when you began this Brexit horse race, I believe you should stay at 10 Downing Street and keep all your rivals at bay. If it all works out in the end, she should enjoy some of the glory, if there is any glory to be had.

Theresa May and her third-time-lucky strategy

It would be quite extraordinary, historically so, if Theresa May succeeds in what she is trying to do. She is actually going to put her Brexit deal, without much if any change to it, before the House of Commons for a third time. She has a conviction that if put to the House a third time, with literally a few days left before Brexit Day March 29, MPs who had previously rejected it will change their minds because of the approaching deadline. Never mind that last night's vote gave Mrs May permission to ask the EU for an extension to the date of about three months. With a little bit of legal jargon here and a touch of blackmail there, Mrs May hopes she will finally get approval. And oh my God she just may be right. Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, is key to this bizarre strategy. He totally bungled his legal advice this week by informing the House that the minor additions Mrs May had managed to get from the EU relating to the Irish backstop arrangement would only marginally reduce the risk of the UK being stuck in the EU customs union for ever. He took all night to come up with that judgment, knowing, surely, that it would be about as much help to Mrs May as a custard pie thrown in her face. So having realised his oops oops mistake Geoffrey Cox has been running around tryng to think of another form of words which might have the opposite effect in the House. This sounds like some sort of devilish sleight of hand stuff verging on the very dodgy. But according to all the huffing and puffing going on, Cox has come up with a wizard idea, something to do with quoting the Vienna Convention under which it would be deemed unfair for the UK to be forced to stay in the EU customs union against its will. Sounds absolutely daft and irrelevant to the actual negotiations going on but apparently there are serious people who think this is a timely wheeze. And, more important, Cox's desperate manoevre seems to be impressing the stoney-faced members of Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party and even some Tory Brexiteers. So when the May Brexit deal comes up for a third attempt next week, the Vienna Convention might bring her the success she has been waiting for for nearly three years. Who would believe it! Geoffrey Cox, shall we call him Humpty Dumpty, fell off the wall and got shattered into little bits this week but next week he might just clamber back to the top of the wall all freshly put together again.

Is impeachment of Trump now off the table?

Nancy Pelosi's extraordinary and unexpected declaration that there is no point in trying to impeach Donald Trump can only be about one thing. She is either convinced or has quietly been told or has somehow discovered that Robert Mueller, special counsel for the investigation into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, has been unable to find any evidence of behind-the-scenes unlawful dealings with Moscow in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election. When she became Speaker of the House, Pelosi made it clear she did not want the Democrats to go straight down the impeachment road. She restrained her more eager colleagues and said it was too early. But now she has given up the idea altogether, much to the fury of her most liberal colleagues who are all for impeaching the president as soon as possible. So what does Pelosi know? Has she spoken to someone in the Mueller team and been warned off? This would be highly unethical if so. But the fact is Mueller, who never seems to smile, is wrapping up his investigation, his report is due any week and from all the indictments he has made so far, no one has been specifically charged with colluding with the Russians. So perhaps Pelosi is just making an intelligent guess that the special counsel has drawn a blank, and she doesn't want her Democratic collegaues running around calling for impeachment proceedings to start if Mueller is going to announce that he has found no evidence of collusion. That would make the Democrats look pretty stupid. Right now, if the Democrats are going to have a chance to unseat Trump in the 2020 elections, they don't want to be attaching their name to an impeachment bandwagon if Mueller is going to pronounce that Trump is in the clear. By the way, if this is going to be Mueller's conclusion it will give Trump an enormous boost. He will probably make a nationwide statement on TV reminding everyone that he had said all along the Russia collusion issue was all rubbish, fake news, made-up, a witchhunt by the Democrats. He will make the most of it, understandably, and will rouse his supporters to a fury as he approaches the 2020 elections. Pelosi knows all this and her move, while infuriating her younger and more liberal colleagues, is wise and practical. There are now 15 candidates for president from the Democratic Party, the latest one, Beto O'Rourke, and all of them will have to tread carefully when throwing accusations against the president. I loved the typical Trump reaction when the oh-so-young Beto O'Rourke announced his candidacy, sitting on a sofa with hs adoring wife. Trump said he threw his hands around a lot and seemed a bit crazy. Hahaha! Actually Trump throws HIS hands around a lot too and certainly looks a little crazy. So perhaps they are made for each other. The final showdown, Beto versus Donald! No, I'm still sticking with Kamala Harris, even when or especialy when Joe Biden finally puts his hat in the ring.

Why the Brexit referendum has led to this total gridlock

The Remain or Leave referendum in 2016 was so simple. Do you want to stay in the EU or leave? There weren't lots of other options such as, if you want to leave would you like to stay in the customs union and/or the single market, do you want to ban free movement of labour, what do you want to do about Northern Ireland vis a vis border checks with the South, are you happy with paying 39 billion euros as a divorce settlement? No nothing like that. It was just a straight question, stay or leave. So 17.4 million said let's get the hell out of the EU and we'll leave the details to our government. Well, in hindsight, how naive can you be? It's the detail which has totally screwed up that original vote by the people. And don't forget that the vast majority of MPS themselves voted to remain in the EU. So all these elected representatives have been fighting to get the least damaging deal while those who voted Leave have done their best to frustrate everyone else and go for a hard Brexit with the EU held at the furthest arm's length as possible. That's why the UK is in a mess of historic proportions. Parliament just doesn't know what it really wants. There is no possibility of unity. None whatsoever. The EU negotiators keep on saying, "We know what the UK Parliament doesn't want. But what we don't know is what it does want." Fair enough except that there is no answer to that. Theresa May has stressed 100 times that she believes it's in the best interests of the country to leave the EU WITH an agreed deal and her deal is the only one on the table. But MPS have twice thrown out her deal. So that argument won't wash anymore. Leaving with no deal should also be thrown out tonight when MPs vote on this specific question. So here is the situation summed up simply: The majority of MPs don't want Theresa May's deal and they don't want a no-deal exit. So what the hell do they want? A soft Brexit in which the UK stays in the customs union and single market or a much harder Brexit which will look like a no-deal in all but name? It doesn't matter really because the hard Brexiteers will never agree with the soft Brexiteers. So extending the exit date beyond March 29 in the vain hope that a compromise can be bashed out will be a total waste of time, and money. There IS no solution other than giving up, cancelling Article 50 and staying in the EU. But I don't think that will happen either. Merde alors!!

The UK is hanging on to its future by its fingertips

As I thought and predicted, Theresa May came away last night from seeing Jean-Claude Juncker, European Commission president, with a piece of legal drivel on paper which really hasn't altered the status quo one bit. A true Brexiteer wouldn't be seen dead putting up his or her hand in approval for a piece of paper full of legal jargon which, as the UK attorney general succinctly put it, "reduces the risk" of the infamous Irish backstop being used by the EU as a permanent device to hold the UK to ransom. Only reduces the risk, not removes it altogether. Which means that at some stage in the future when trade talks between the EU and UK break down with no agreement, the backstop will still be singing and dancing and dictating relations with the EU. Or, in simple terms, the EU will still have the trump (NOT Trump) card which will force the UK to remain in the customs union for ever. And if the UK is obliged to stay in the customs union in order to avoid the return of security checks on the North/South Irish border, it will prevent Her Majesty's Government from negotiating trade deals with countries outside the EU because the UK will have to abide by the EU trade rules. OK, if the EU and UK have wonderful trade relationship talks and all is agreed amicably over the next two years, and the backstop is lifted, then life will be fine. But judging by the last two and a half years of bitter in-fighting over the UK's exit from the EU, it seems highy unlikely that all will go well when the trade talks start. Ergo, the Brexiteers will never support a Brexit deal in which the Irish backstop remains a huge elephant in the conference room. I am writing this three hours before the vote is due in the House of Commons. Anyone who is good at maths will be working out the numbers right now and coming to the conclusion that Theresa May is going to lose by between 100 and 150 votes. We're too late for miracles. What we are in for is total impasse. The latest version of the Brexit deal is thrown out. MPs then vote by a huge majority against a no-deal Brexit. Then they vote for an extension to Article 50 so we dont have to leave the EU on March 29 and will have another couple of months' grace to go back to negotiating a better deal!!! But for heaven's sake, surely that will be a complete waste of time. Juncker has already stated there will be no third chance. So it will be two more months of fruitless back-and-forth trips to Brussels and Strasbourg and in the meantime the UK will have to continue paying the EU the vast sums it is obliged to fork out as a member of the EU. Probably at least $1 billion a month. Everyone in the political world knows this, so why are they playing this ridiculous game? In my view, Brexit is dead. We tried and failed. Brexiteers certainly failed. The UK will have to stay in the EU and who runs the UK in the foreseeable future, God knows!!

Brexit down to the wire and beyond

Theresa May heads off to Strasbourg to see Jean-Claude Juncker, the very self-satisfied president of the European Commission. You do wonder what on earth this late-late-late trip is going to achieve. Juncker has up to now given absolutely no hint that he is ready to save the day, indeed save Theresa May, and provide the key language which might just might make the difference and persuade all Tory MPs at least and the Northern Ireland Democratic Unionist Party to vote for the prime minister's deal. Why would he suddenly become benign and hand such a gift to Theresa May? He won't because, quite simply, he doesn't want the UK to leave the EU and he is hoping that another defeat in the House of Commons for May will eventually lead to another referendum in which the tired exhausted fed-up British people will reverse their opinion and beg to stay in the EU. Voila! All the agony and nightmare over. But if that were to happen which is possible but unlikely, Theresa May would have to resign, there would be a horrible leadership battle, the Tory Party would implode and in would walk Jeremy Corbyn into 10 Downing Street after winning a dreadful, divisive election campaign. Is that what Juncker wants? Well, yes, as long as the UK is still a member of the EU. So watch out tomorrow. Theresa will have returned empty-handed from Strasbourg, she will be massively defeated in the House of Commons when a vote is put befoe MPs, and chaos will ensue. There are no longer any good options left. Just some form of anarchy.

If you want an armed drone China is always in the market

Reaper and Rainbow armed drones look alike, operate from similar altitudes, can drop anti-armour missiles and precision-guided bombs and are in demand throughout the Middle East. But only Rainbow is for sale. Reaper, the advanced, heavily armed drone which has a record of kills over Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia, is American. Rainbow, already used by Saudi Arabia over Yemen, is Chinese. The sale of US armed drones is restricted by America’s membership of the missile technology control regime, set up in 1987 to prevent the spread of ballistic missiles and other weapons. China, while not a signatory, agreed originally to abide by its basic guidelines, but is today aggressively offering Rainbow and another version called Wing Loong II, to whoever wants them. As a result, armed drones are everywhere in the Middle East. For the Chinese, it has been a gift. With the US unable to sell armed drones to even the closest allies in the Middle East, China has swamped the market with its own unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). China has also developed strategic relationships in countries which have previously relied on the US to provide the weapons they want to buy. “Washington told its allies in the region that they can have the unarmed surveillance versions but not armed, whereas the Chinese don’t seem to have a problem and offer countries whatever they want,” Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, said. “At arms fairs, every Chinese defence manufacturer seems to have a UAV on offer,” he said. The MQ-9 Reaper, made by General Atomic Aeronautical Systems, and the CH-4B Rainbow, developed by the state-owned China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation, look almost identical. However, the American drone is superior. It has more advanced sensors and on-board computers which are capable of pinpointing crucial data from the mass of images taken during a flight mission. Reaper also carries five times the bomb and missile payload than its Chinese rival. With armed drones having become the weapon of choice for many countries, partly as a result of the unique targeting capabilities demonstrated by Israeli and American models, China has stepped in where the US has feared to tread. The Chinese Rainbow is also half the price of the Reaper. In Yemen, there are more Saudi and UAE Chinese armed drones operating against Huthi rebels than there are Reapers targeting al-Qaeda terrorists in the country. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have their own American Predator drones operating over Yemen. But they are only the unarmed surveillance version and cannot be integrated with the Chinese Rainbow. It’s a mismatch which gives the US at least some sense of relief. The Pentagon allows interoperability of that kind only within the Nato alliance.

Maduro clings on in the darkness

Several days and nights of darkness in Venezuela with the power crippled but Maduro lives on. Can anyone in the population still support him? The country relies on hydroelectric power but the government, initially under Chavez, and since the death of the revolutionary madman, under bus-driver Maduro, has chronically failed to invest money in maintaining and updating the power system. So total breakdown earlier this week. Had there been a pre-planned coup plot to seize such a moment to unseat Maduro, the darkness would have provided a perfect backdrop. But the people of Venezuela are only interested in surviving, keeping their families fed when possible and hoping for a miracle. The darkness just added to their woes and fears. Many hospitals did not even have their own emergency generators to keep vital power systems going, so at least two people have died. Had there been food in the shops, perhaps there would have been looting. But Venezuela is a country of desperation where a looter would find only empty shelves. But Maduro keeps safe and, no doubt, well fed. He blames anyone but himself, whether it's the opposition or the Americans. Unfortunately he now knows that the US has no intention of invading Venezuela because Elliott Abrams, Trump's special envoy to Venezuela, said so during a telephone conversation with two Swiss oficials who turned out to be well known Russian comedian pranksters. How on earth the Russians succeeded yet again in getting to talk to key public figures is beyond me. But it gave away the secret. Trump's declaration that a military option was on the table was just bluster. Unless, intriguingly, Maduro were to send his storm troopers to seize the US embassy in Caracas, according to Abrams. Well, even Maduro is not stupid enough to do that, surely! So I would say Maduro is a much-relieved man as he sits waiting for the lights to come back on.

Every nuke or you get nothing in return

It has now come out that Trump told Kim Jong-un at the Hanoi summit: "I want all your nukes and ballistic missiles and chemical and biological weapons and then and only then will I consider lifting sanctions". Wow, no wonder the North Korean leader looked so pissed off when the summit came to an abrupt end. No sympathy from me but it does seem a little extraordinary that not even the smallest carrot was offered while the big stick was being wielded. Trump made it clear it had to be all or nothing. So it was nothing. Kim went back to his paLace in Pyongyang and ordered his nuclear and missile boys to start rebuilding a missile site which he had started to dismantle. So not exactly progress, Mr President. Knowing what he had told Kim, Trump still went back to Washington saying he thought there would be room for negotiations in future. But in the real brutal world where nukes are king, I can't see Kim contemplating a third summit unless he gets the indication - nay, promise - of something coming his way if he steps closer towards Trump's demands. John Bolton, national security adviser, is the man behind Trump dictating the language. He is a rabid opponent of North Korea and its nuclear dreams and clearly advised Trump to stand firm and give nothing away. I wonder if Mike Pompeo, secretary of state and nominally in charge of the negotiations, agreed with the stand insisted on by Bolton who, in his job, is strictly an adviser, albeit the most important one, and doesn't have a department to run like Pompeo. Obviously the hardline Bolton is leading the field right now and has both of Trump's ears. The trouble is, having taken an all-or-nothing approach, how on earth can you soften that in the future if you still want to be seen as tough and strong and unrelenting which is what Bolton wants. It's a bold but, I'm afraid, self-defeating strategy because it will drive Kim back into the trenches and he won't want to talk again with his friend in the White House. He will just rely on China as ever. Meanwhile, apparently Jimmy Carter has offered at the age of 94 to return to North Korea - the only US president ever to have been, when Kim's grandfather was the boss - to see if he can sort it all out. Will Trump want that? No!

John Kelly splits with Trump on The Wall

General John Kelly, erstwhile White House chief of staff and previously Secretary of Homeland Security, has been speaking his mind for the first time since leaving Donald Trump's employ. Being a sensible chap and not out for any sort of revenge or a desperate need to reveal all, Kelly gave a few tidbits away but nothing really to make the president explode. What he did say during an on-stage interview at Duke University in North Carolina was that it would be a waste of money to build a wall along the whole length of the US/Mexico border - roughly 2.000 miles. It was not quite accusing Trump of being wrong and wasteful but he did go on to say, to justify his remark, that the vast majority of immigrants who tried to cross the border did so for economic reasons, to make better lives for themselves, and for that Kelly was in sympathy. Oh dear, Trump won't like that. Has he tweeted yet? He is convinced - by whom I'm not sure - that the border is being overrun by drug traffikers, rapists, criminals of every kind and generally people who have no right to see the great United States as a refuge from terror, poverty and malnutrition. Kelly saw the reality of the border when he was in chharge of homeland security and must have brought up his views many times when Trump was fuming about wanting to get on with the construction of the wall. It's partly why Trump decided he had had enough of the retired four-star general and went, instead, to Mick Mulvaney to run the shop. I liked the advice Kelly gave Mulvaney as he took over at the White House. Tell the president what he needs to hear "and then run for it". Hahaha. I bet that's good advice.

Trump takes the mickey out of Hillary

Donald Trump is an unforgiving human being. After Hillary Clinton annunced, thank God, that she would not be running for president for a third time, instead of just keeping quiet and getting on with trying to run the country, Trump couldn't resist a nasty dig at his former rival for the White House. He tweeted - how else - that Hillary would be "sorely missed". Heavy irony. His actual words were "(Crooked) Hillary Clinton confirms she will not run in 2020, rules out a third bid for White House. Aw-shucks does that mean I won't get to run against her again? She will be sorely missed." As Hillary later tweeted back, why was he so obssessed with her? Well, one of the reasons he's obsessed with her is that despite the fact he beat her through the electoral college voting system, she still won three million more of the popular votes than he did. That was and is still bad for his ego. Then of course the campaign itself was so vitriolic, with him and his wild-eyed supporters screaming for her to be sent to jail for misusing her private emails while she was secretary of state, that Trump clearly hates the sight of her and wishes her ill even when she has declared she is longer dreaming of being president. He has had his fun taunting Hillary and will no doubt get on with slamming those who are lining up to take him on from the Democratic Party. Senator Elizabeth Warren has already received two barrels-worth of contempt and with so many Democrats joining the presidential race, he's going to have a field day digging up the dirt on his potential rivals. For the Democrats of course there is so much dirt lying around linked or allegedly linked to Trump that they won't have any problem in answering back.

Congress hires Russian mob prosecutor to investigate Trump ho ho!

The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives has just made an appointment which has got to have involved a deep belly laugh. Adam Schiff, House intelligence committee chairman, has hired a lawyer who has in the past prosecuted cases against Russian mobsters. It can't be a coincidence. So the Russian mobster legal expert, Daniel Goldman, has joined the committee to act as chief adviser on how it should investigate the Russian collusion allegations made against Donald Trump. There is a certain if not definite irony in this appointment. But with his background, Goldman, as director of investigations as well as senior adviser, will be a pretty potent adversary for the president. No one is yet talking about impeachment, but the Goldman appointment is a serious step towards a potential sticky end for Trump. Remember one of his main lawyers is Rudy Giuliani who has a habit of making extraordinary and not-helpful-to-his-master remarks and statements. This fellow Goldman will probably eat Giuliani for breakfast. He is going to be looking into all kinds of allegations being made aganst Trump, not just Russian collusion but also alleged dodgy business dealings. As if the Robert Mueller investigation into Russian collusion is not enough to infuriate the president. Now he has a fancy lawyer delving into the darkness. Both Mueller and Goldman spell big trouble for Trump. BIG trouble. Not to forget of course the pursuit of Trump by Democrat Jerry Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, who has sent off demands for cooperation from 81 people associated with the president and are expected to be fored to appear before him and his committee which will be investigating allegations of obstruction of ustice, corruption and abuse of power. Oh my God, you almost feel sorry for Trump. It's beginning to becme overwhelming.

Maduro doesn't arrest his rival!!

Nicolas Maduro appears to have done the first sensible thing in his life. He didn't order his henchmen to go to Caracas airport and arrest the returning Juan Guaido who had been on a tour of South American countries to gather support for his campaign to oust the embattled Venezuelan president. The Caracas supreme court had banned him from travelling out of the country but he went anyway and must have expected to be arrested as soon as he came down the gangway back onto Venezuelan soil. But Maduro must have realised that arresting Guaido at this point would bring the wrath of the Americans down on his head. Venezuela was THE global story not that long ago and every headline attacked him one way or the other. Perhaps he thought to himself that if he kept quiet for a bit the nightmare might go away. His personal nightmare that is, the one that involves his military marching up the steps of his palace and frogmarching him away to an uncertain future. So he held off from detaining Guiado but that doesn't mean it won't happen over the next few months. Maduro is still able to rely on his heavily bribed generals and on the contracted Russian military who are keeping the dictator safe and well. Today the Russian chief of the general staff, General Valeri Gerasimov, accused the US of running a covert programme to undermine countries such as Venezuela. Well the US has certainly given its backing to Guaido because he promises hope for the suffering Venezuelan people. But the Russians? All they want is a nice big foothold in the country and have put all their money on Maduro, never mind the atrocious way he has destroyed the country's economy and cares not a fig for his people. The Russians I have met over the years have all been charming, hospitable and decent human beings but they have a government and a leader who make despicable decisions for despicable reasons. They support Bashar Assad even though he was responsible for the deaths of thousands of his people. Does the Kremlin have no comprehension of what is right and just in this world? All they want to do is to subvert to push their interests and then boldly deny it has anything to do with them. So Maduro will survive while Moscow supports him. Guaido is still a free man but I fear for his safety.

Joe Biden, will you or won't you?

Watching Joe Biden's anguished ruminations over whether to put his name forward as a 2020 presidential candidate is painful. On the whole the former vice-president is a good guy who comes off as a nice politician. His latest concerns are about money. Will he get enough donations to run a campaign. He doesn't want to put the cart before the horse. In other words, if he declares now that he will have a go at the presidency and then finds no one wants to back him financially, he will look pretty silly. When you try to become president of the United States, it is unfortunately a fact of life that you must spend millions and millions of dollars during the campaign to get your message across. Bernie Sanders, who is a sucker for punishment and has declared his candidacy despite losing out to Hillary Clinton the last time round, has already been offered $10 million and he has only just declared. That's pretty impressive although I seriously doubt he will win the Democratic nomination, let alone be the man to beat Trump. He's a good guy and tougher than Biden I suspect but there is something about him which puts me off. Biden can't make up his mind, not just because of the money side of things but because I don't know whether he really really wants to be pesident. He is in his seventies and life can be good without having the most stressful job in the world. Is it honestly his life ambition to be president, even in his advanced years, or is everyone egging him on, just as they did the last time when he backed off because of the tragedy of his son? Of course he has had a proper taste of the White House power and glory when he was vice-president under Barack Obama. He knows how the system works, he is respected by Congress although Congress has changed beyond recognition since he was a senator from Delaware between 1973 and 2009. But the world is a helluva lot tougher and being president these days is a pretty thankless task. Perhaps it always was. So, Joe, think carefully before you step into the ring. I suspect he will finally go for it but he will be outgunned by one of the other more thrusting Democratic candidates.

Why was the US ignorant of what was in Kim Jong-un's mind?

In all the pre-summit planning and discussion, how is it possible that the US team clearly didn't have any idea that Kim Jong-un was going to effectively scupper the meeting with Donald Trump by demanding an impossibe concession? He said he wanted every economic sanction lifted in return for the odd dismantling of nuclear installations. Did Kim really think Trump would cave in? Perhaps he did. That unexpected offer to cancel US/South Korean military exercises at the first summit must have made Kim hopeful of getting the president to make another gesture of a similar scale. But cancelling, temporarily, military exercises is wholly different from a total lifting of sanctions. Surely Kim knew that? But I guess he thought, "What the hell, if you don't ask, you don't get". But he took a giant step in the wrong direction, and Trump brought the summit to an abrupt end for which the president has received support even from leading Democrats. But in all the planning for the summit, did both sides not draw up a list of possible concessions? Was there any form of provisional agreement that such concessions would be presented to Trump and Kim for signature on Day Two of the summit? This is how summits work. Most of the hard labour is done beforehand and all the two leaders have to do is smile, be nice to each other for the cameras, crack a joke or two and get out the fountain pens. Months of hard work was thrown out of the window when Kim made a demand Trump couldn't accept. Now it's going to be impasse for months. Perhaps Trump and Kim need new negotiating teams. How about Kim's beloved sister on the North Korean side and Nikki Haley, ex UN ambassador, on the American side. I'm sure Boeing, her new employer, will let her go for a few months. The men failed. Let the women have a go!