Thread by @Staedtler

English journalism is still not thinking. I'm going to give up on it. It's like waiting for plankton to evolve.

Two years ago the story was that Theresa May was misusing Article 50 to try and get a treaty renegotiation. Some sort of personal inadequacy, I think. She wanted to do something Cameron couldn't.

Anyway, the English media ignored all that because journalism is mostly bovine, feeding on the sprouts of village gossip.

So Theresa May wanted a new treaty. That was news until she gave Article 50 notice.

After she gave Article 50 notice, the news was that she was going to call an election and lose her majority, which she then went and did.

See the pattern? English journalism has got it all wrong. News isn't what's just happened, news is what happens next.
And the next thing Theresa May was going to do after losing her majority was resign.

Like I said, it was a misuse of Article 50. She never intended to dissolve our membership. She always intended to subvert the process and get herself into a treaty renegotiation.

And once you understand it you can see that Theresa May is never going to be able to sign a withdrawal agreement. She gambled that she would never have to.

Gambled everything. The union, the economy, the Good Friday agreement.

So then the story changed again. Now it was how long would a failed and corrupt prime minister be allowed to prove herself incapable of government before the Conservative Party replaced her with a proper leader.

And that is the current story. Not the fartings from Theresa May's backside, but the question of when, in the absence of a withdrawal agreement, the Conservative Party will remove her from the job.
Not if, but when.

That's journalism. Thinking ahead. Analysing. Not the kind of beery gossip that the media gets itself excited about all the time.