Thread by @atatimelikethis

#FBPE We're in the end game and are being pushed into face-saving moves by brexiters.

In the thread below I assert we can prove A50 is invalidated. I'm doubling down. We breached A50 in 2017 and we are not in the process.

Any lawyers wanna play?⏬

https://twitter.com/atatimelikethis/status/1179837293995188224?s=20

Here's the case. In addition to the points in the thread, I've now been through all 180 leaflets from the 2016 referendum. Plus hours & hours of film.

While the single market is occasionally mentioned I find no reference to leaving Customs Union anywhere

I find the opposite. ⏬

It's therefore entirely possible that a voter would have concluded that an FTA deal would be the Brexit result in order to vote leave. We know this is true as it's already the basis for no-deal invalidity above

But I want now to dispute the Miller 1 objections coming at me.

Theresa May was explicit in her Article 50 wording. That parliament had confirmed the result of the 2016 Referendum.

With campaign evidence, we can now assert Parliament confirmed that being in the Customs Union was required

The next vote to contradict that definition was GE17

At GE17 the tories did indeed run on a mandate to leave the CU

But while much STVote accounting has been used to get to "80% Brexit support" we can be sure that the tories did NOT get a mandate for their interpretation, in fact, they reduced their mandate
We rejected the CU idea

Summary. This argument is post Miller 1.

1. Parliament put EUref into law.
2. May said that was based on the EUref outcome.
3. Therefore only confirmation in law is Customs Union Brexit.
4. No current Brexit has CU.
5. QED A50 is breached now or breaches at the 2 year counter