I’ve not got time or the motivation to respond in great detail or to break up this "whataboutery" into quotes, so in summary: 1. "[Leave are] driving a coach and horses through the constitution, trashing the established norms of politics and allowing the Executive free rein", is nothing to do with my personal politics. It is a statement of fact (as demonstrated by the SC ruling) and a statement of fact is true regardless of whether you agree with it or not. No idea what you mean by "personal interests" or what relevance they might have but please don't feel the need to expand on it. 2. I don't recall saying that Remain "are doing nothing of the sort". That's a clumsy straw man argument. In fact I have said the very opposite, on this very forum ie: that both sides are doing whatever they can to bring about the result they desire. If I have time I will find and link the post(s). So far, Leave have been found to have acted unlawfully in some of what they have done, but Remain haven't. Furthermore, at no point have Remain attempted to "allow the Executive free rein" (which is the really dangerous aspect). Just the opposite in fact - they took the Executive all the way to the SC, more than once, in order to rein the Executive in and hold it to account. 3. "Reasoned assessment of the situation": As I have said above, twice, to Noob, I do not know enough about the facts to pass an opinion on it. Even if I did know the facts in sufficient detail, given what is alleged, it's quite likely to involve fairly obscure perhaps even ancient and arcane matters of law and Parliamentary procedure which I probably won't know off the top of my head. What you and Noob are requesting, virtually demanding, is like turning up at a Yamaha* workshop, dropping an exotic and possibly antique Ducati race engine on the bench and expecting an instant opinion. The very fact that you demand an instant opinion shows that neither of you really grasp the potential complexity of the issues. Jumping to conclusions and gobbing off with ill-informed opinions helps nobody. Unfortunately, on this forum, that doesn't seem to stop a number of contributors doing so. 4. "Foreign power" - again, I believe I have already said, semi-rhetorically (to Markduc), that he and by extension you should go away and look up the definition of "foreign power". Again, just in case you missed it the previous 3 times I have said it - I do not have enough knowledge of the facts to determine whether what Bercow was doing was "negotiating". So, the rabid accusations of "negotiating with a foreign power" are pretty empty when bandied around people who haven't even bothered to check whether the EU is defined as a "foreign power" vis a vis the UK in international law. 4. If Remain were "burning down constitutional norms" as you claim then the courts are open to Leave supporters as well, you know. Why don't you put your money where your keyboard is and look into starting a Crowdfunding campaign to bring legal proceedings (against Bercow and/or any other person/body who attracts your ire), like Gina Miller, Joanne Cherry, John Major and Jo Maugham have done? *My practice is mainly commercial/general civil work, housing/landlord & tenant and general knockabout sex, drugs and violence crime, whereas this Bercow business seems to touch on very specialist matters of constitutional law, parliamentary procedure/custom/convention and international law.