Re-energized partnership between the U.S. and UK allowed Parliament to push through Article 50 vote with overwhelming consensus

The Leave vote won the EU Referendum - now for the UK to leave the EU (Brexit) it has to sign Article 50 of The Lisbon Treaty - mocked up here - about to sign.

In less than a week since Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May went to the White House to visit with the new American President Donald Trump, the lower house of the British parliament voted overwhelmingly today to go ahead with filing Article 50, and begin the process to exit from the European Union.

With a vote of 498 to 114 in the House of Commons, the scuttlebutt created when the British courts ordered that parliament would need to vote on approving the Brexit Referendum before the nation could file Article 50 ended up being much ado about nothing.

MP’s in Parliament have voted 498 to 114 to authorize Prime Minster Theresa May to Trigger Article 50 and begin the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union. The vote officiates the result of the June 23rd, 2016 “Brexit” Referendum where a majority of UK citizens indicated a desire to leave the EU. An amendment introduced by the Scottish National Party (SNP) which called on the Government to consult the devolved powers on Brexit and calls on her to set out her objectives for the negotiation was rejected. The vote authorizes Theresa May to begin the withdrawal process, which she has indicated she will do by the end of March, 2017.

The BBC reports that talks with the EU are expected to last for up to two years, and that the UK will have officially left the EU by 2019. – Zerohedge

Besides the re-energizing of the relationship Britain has long had with the United States, the prospect of economic growth rapidly expanding once the nation fully leaves the Union appears to have had alot to do with today’s consensus.  In fact, a recent European watchdog reported that the UK had the best economy in Europe for 2016, and this despite analysts and experts predicting that they would go into recession if they had voted in favor of leaving the EU.

Just like the way Russia has prospered and flourished following their sanctions on Europe, and the Eurasian economy having to forge new partnerships elsewhere to replace lost imports, so too does Britain have a much brighter future now that they are no longer going to be under the stanglehold that is the EU bureaucracy.

Kenneth Schortgen Jr is a writer for The Daily Economist, Secretsofthefed.comRoguemoney.net, and Viral Liberty, and hosts the popular youtube podcast on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Ken can also be heard Wednesday afternoons giving an weekly economic report on the Angel Clark radio show.

HERE IS A LIST OF EVERY SINGLE TIME OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE THAT DEMS & MEDIA COVERED UP “Impeach!” It’s been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama’s administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it’s back with a vengeance. Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the “I” word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.” Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump. Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon. “Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.” Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday. The posters read: “If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans’ tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. … Resign now.” But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why? At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime. “The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained: For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code. However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless “gotcha” announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct. A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.” However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him. . Obama’s Iran nuke deal Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server Obama IRS targets conservatives Obama’s DOJ spies on AP reporters Obamacare & Obama’s false promises Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order Benghazi-gate Operation Fast & Furious 5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl Extortion 17 ‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act Illegally conducting war against Libya NSA: Spying on Americans Muslim Brotherhood ties Miriam Carey Birth certificate Executive orders Solyndra and the lost $535 million Egypt Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’