VITAL 'SKY NEWS' LEADERSHIP DEBATE

_{THERESA MAY -V- JEREMY CORBYN}

_{IN THE ‘SKY NEWS’ TV LEADERSHIP DEBATE.}

 

_{GREAT BRITAIN NOW FACES VERY GREAT PERIL}

_{THIS 'GENERAL ELECTION' DETERMINES, WHETHER, UNDER THE PREMIERSHIP OF THERESA MAY,}

_{WHETHER THE COUNTRY BECOMES A TRUE DEMOCRACY? OR, A WHOLLY, "TOTALITARIAN REGIME"?}

 

_{IN THIS SKY NEWS DEBATE, THIS WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION TO ASK THERESA MAY.}

_{THERESA MAY, DO YOU BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY?}

_{Replying in the 'affirmative'; then hit her with this:}

 

_{WHY THEN CANNOT YOU RELY ON "DEMOCRACY" ?
IN ORDER TO GET LEGISLATION PASSED, BY PARLIAMENT?}

_{WHY CANNOT YOU RELY ON THE "FREE VOTE" OF PARLIAMENT IN ORDER TO PASS 'ACTS' 'MOTIONS' AND 'BILLS' IN PARLIAMENT?}

_{WHY MUST YOU USE THE 'POLITICAL PARTY WHIPS' TO INSTRUCT MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT ON HOW THEY MUST VOTE?}

 

_{INFORMATION: THIS IS ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL IN DETERMINING IF, THERESA MAY, IS ELIGIBLE TO GOVERN THE COUNTRY.}

 _{AN 'UNDEMOCRATIC' PRIME MINISTER IS NOT FIT TO HOLD THAT OFFICE.}

_{To this QUESTION, she can offer no explanation at all.}

_{Because, the 'political party' WHIPS in parliament, has no legality at all.}

 

_EXPLANATION:

 

_{1.       When the political party WHIPS instruct Members of Parliament on how they should or must vote in respect of all legislation being presented to parliament for the vote.}

_{2.       The WHIPS, in doing this, overrule and supplant all 'rightful influence' that might have been placed upon those 'elected' Members of Parliament, by the constituents.}

_{3.       This, therefore, creates, the, "PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE"}

_{4.       Yet, the "PREJUDICE OF THE PEOPLE" by parliament, is specifically outlawed and proscribed by the precedent of law set out in,}

_{5.       "THE STATUTE IN FORCE/BILL OF RIGHTS 1689/THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED".}

_{6.       This paragraph, of that Bill, specifically instructs parliament that, parliament may 'enact' any of the "PREMISES" of that Bill, but, only upon the conditions as set out in the paragraph, "The Said Rights Claimed"; which specifically instructs parliament, that when parliament 'enacts' any of the "Premises" of that Bill, that, nothing, "OUGHT PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE".}

 

_{THE POLITICAL PARTY 'WHIPS' IN PARLIAMENT DO "PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE" - THEREFORE, THE WHIPS IN PARLIAMENT - HAS NO LEGALITY AT ALL.}

 

_{Here is the 'EVIDENCE' for this, here is that paragraph in that Bill,}

 

_{“The Said Rights Claimed”:}

_{“And they do Claime Demand and Insist upon all and singular The Premises as their undoubted Rights and Liberties and that noe Declarations Judgements Doeings or Proceedings to the Prejudice of the People, in any of the said Premises, ought in any wise to be drawne hereafter, into Consequence or Example”}

 

_NOTE:

_{The BRITISH JUDICIARY DETERMINES AND RULES THAT "PARLIAMENT CANNOT BE QUESTIONED IN THE COURTS";}

_{And, in a complete, "Conspiracy to pervert the course of Justice", deceives the British People, by ruling that "Article 9" of the "Bill of Rights 1689" provides the legality for that denial. Ruling, that "Article 9" in, 'LAW'; is, "ABSOLUTE".}

 

_{This is a complete and utter 'FABRICATION' because, "Article 9" is not 'absolute' at all; it is wholly 'conditional' and entirely dependent upon the conditions set out in the, ‘precedent’, of law, of, "The Said Rights Claimed".}

_{"Article 9", is merely one of the 13 "Articles" set out in the Bill; but, "The Said Rights Claimed" has the overall 'authority' of the entire Bill. Because, it states within it's text, that it has the 'legal authority' over all other "PREMISES" of the Bill.}

 

_{"THE SAID RIGHTS CLAIMED" OVERRULES "ARTICLE 9" AND, THE, "SUPREMACY OF PARLIAMENT"; IF AND WHENEVER,}

_{PARLIAMENT, "PREJUDICE THE PEOPLE".}

 

_CONCLUSION:

_{SKY NEWS DID NOT ASK 'THERESA MAY' THIS QUESTION IN THAT TV DEBATE.}

_{THE WHOLE COUNTRY NOW KNOWS THAT 'SKY NEWS' IS WHOLLY GUILTY OF TRANSMITTING, "FAKE NEWS"}

_{BECAUSE, "FAKE NEWS" IS NOT ONLY WHAT HAS BEEN SAID OR IMPLIED, IN REPORTING;}

_{IT IS WHAT HAS BEEN, 'FULLY AWARE OF'; YET, 'PURPOSELY', OMITTED AS WELL.}

 

_{Gordon J Sheppard}