Be in no doubt fellow true Brexiteers, this is a worrying Brexit development.
PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW:
We've all seen the disarray that the Remainer MPs are in, haven't we.
They appear to be getting more desperate by the day to try and stop the UK leaving the EU on the 31st of October – they claim they want to stop a no deal Brexit, but we know what they are really all angling for don't we?
But they can't even agree on how to stop Brexit or what to offer in its place without using the 'R' word – revoke.
But there is now another equally unsettling plan being hatched.
And this one comes from a slightly unexpected quarter and it sounds Brexit supportive on the face of it, but there are hidden dangers.
The idea is that in order to stop a no deal, it is said that up to fifty Labour MPs would side with the Boris Johnson government to vote through any deal he comes up with, rather than face a no deal.
According to the Express, Labour MP Stephen Kinnock now regrets not voting for Theresa May's Withdrawal Agreement surrender treaty saying:
"We had guarantees on workers' rights, a customs union at least until the next election and even a vote on a second referendum at committee stage.
"We should have gone for that, I regret it deeply."
And he said that a large number of his Labour colleagues would vote with the government if it could get a deal with the EU.
But the problem for me is that the only deal that the EU will countenance is the Withdrawal Agreement, Irish border backstop and all.
And the only change I can see to that deal would be to tinker with the political declaration to try and make the backstop look more palatable.
This is backed up by a report in the Sun saying that Angela Merkel will be saying 'no' to any request from Boris to renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement itself.
Now, the dangers to the UK if that Withdrawal Agreement got through are obvious.
And that offer from Labour MPs of backing it, might also come with strings attached, like a further Article 50 extension just to 'get the deal over the line' with the EU and domestically or whatever.
Would Boris Johnson and his adviser Dominic Cummings be tempted by this sort of offer? Would they go for a potentially UK damaging deal as long as they thought they could get away with spinning it as Brexit? A deal with the Irish backstop and more years under the control of Brussels and the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
And that's the bit that worries me and why I call it a dangerous development for Brexit.
But there is also a silver lining here.
The danger for the anti-Brexit lobby in the Commons now, is that if MPs do manage to wrest control of the order paper from the government, like they did earlier this year to try and pass anti-Brexit legislation, they could end up facilitating a vote for the Withdrawal Agreement, instead of for their favoured options of a second referendum or General Election!
Or it could at least end up as one of the options in any vote, so further splitting down any attempt to thwart Brexit.
That will give the anti-Brexit mob another potential headache to deal with.
But we must also not forget the political declaration that Theresa May couldn't get the House to agree to either.
It is a requirement in statute law under the Withdrawal Act that both the Withdrawal Agreement and the political declaration are voted through by the House of Commons before the Withdrawal Agreement surrender treaty itself can be ratified with the EU.
And the chances of that happening? Who knows.
Gets murkier by the day, doesn't it?
And every time politicians open their mouths and say these sorts of things, it just muddies the water further while hindering not just the government, but thankfully also the majority pro-Remain faction in Parliament.