So goodbye Keith. I had taken a decision that if you carried on like this I would not respond until after I get back from my next holiday, which will be September.

You say there are no tricks or traps in what you said: I agree, that would give them too much credit. They are simply things you know are misrepresentations, such as equating Jim's accurate remark that David Davis insisted [the December document] was much more a statement of intent than "legally enforceable" almost immediately after the agreement was issued. That is what he said. Jim knows he did, I know he did and you know he did (because you commented on it earlier in the thread.)   That the official policy has always been to seen 'no hard border' matters not one whit, since what Jim was clearly talking about was the David Davis response. Which you know all about but choose to ignore by pretending the topic was the overall government policy, when you know full well it was not.

And you do this in order to persuade people to type out long explanations like this. That's what has been graced with the name of a 'hoop'. Well, sorry, that's enough. Maybe after September...