The timing of this is quite awkward. It may that there's already a deal with the US under wraps but getting it settled depends on Trump being at the controls. Getting it done, including leaving the EU, before the US election is a tall order. If Trump gets re-elected then leaving the EU in a hard Brexit fits nicely but betting on Trump being around in 2021 is pretty bold.

Yes, trade talks with the US are a bit on shaky grounds, even if the senat approves with whatever will be negotiated.
I'm not too sure it will replace all the trade the UK has with EU + partners but that's a ''wait and see'' situation.

In general though, one should not confuse trade talks with the exit withdrawal talks. There's nothing similar about it.

So that's going to be;
Nicky Morgan
Zac Goldsmith

Who next on the unelected bureaucratic gravy train....... Oh wait, that's the label for the EU, isn't it? In the UK, it's 'democracy'..... Carry on., what a Carry On in Westminster.

The MO of the EU is to do nothing until 59 minutes to 12.
The MO of any civil service is to shout 'Can't be done' right up to the point it gets done.
Anyone who's actually worked in the real world will know that deadlines are what makes the world go around.
It is common sense to set them. Without them monopolistic, fat, lazy, inward looking organisations simply do nothing and use time as a currency... and this applies as much to the UK civil service as to the EU.
Johnson's deadline will send a message to his own team as much as the EU.

That's a really weird way of saying 11:01

Yepp.... Got that one wrong... Should of course have been 7.24

Obviously, that is correct. I was beginning to wonder if you'd gone peculiar there for a while.

Nigel Farage as a guess, and possibly, but more unlikely, Anne Widdecombe

Believe me, I've tried to find examples of this ''last minute trade deal agreement'' by the EU and can not find it. Maybe you have one ?
New FTA negotiations are normally not time limited.

Johnson's ERG team wants No deal but, like you said (or someone else) new trade deal with the US might give a bit of a problem.
For the moment he's got a window till somewhere in June or July (don't fancy looking it up) and then at last he should tell people and businesses what his plan is (assuming he will have one by then).

Yes there has. Does that mean that there will be no change of circumstances ever again that might change something? Recession? Difficulties in obtaining alternative trade agreements? Perhaps a shortage of some vital supplies that the EU has managed to get hold of. Maybe the EU that "needs us more than we need them" will suddenly accept that and beg us not to leave. Lots could happen.

Did you notice that this very clear simple message about getting Brexit done was voted for by 3 and a half million fewer than voted to leave in the referendum?

Perhaps most importantly, if there's no chance of second thoughts or any sort of change that might bring about second thoughts on Brexit, then why is Boris wanting to change the law to prevent anything stopping it?

Since once again, you select parts of a post and ignore other parts I'll remind you of what else I posted.

" I take your point that force majeur could impose a dramatic rethink, but I'd argue that something the size of a 10.0 earthquake imposing itself on brexit thinking would be needed to impact the commons as a whole, but haven't we seen the commons capable of taking back control when it feels it needs to?
So dinna worry yer heed too much aboot that, laddie.."

What I'm suggesting is that it's possible for the commons to once again overrule the wishes of a tyranical PM by taking control of events should they need to.
I've argued before that the election result was driven by brexit... but not exclusively.
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50770798
The above link displays the results and if you scroll down to the two charts entitled 'Conservatives won most of the UK's leave supporting seats' you'll note that some referendum leave seats voted labour and and vice versa. For this reason you cannot ascribe non-conservative voting to exclusively 'remain'. In other words you cannot assume all non-conservative votes voted that way because they supported remain and other reasons must have intervened. Had this not been the case then all previous leave seats would have voted conservative, which did not happen.
There is a simple reason why Johnson wants to introduce a deadline. It concentrates the mind. I think it's understood that both sides would like to leave with a decent trade deal. I know there's a strong rumour going around that Johnson wants to trash the UK economy, but I'd suggest that's one of those tales that gets plastered to the front page of the Sun on a bad news day.
We are told that trade deals take a long time. Why? No doubt they're complicated but so was building the first A bomb... but the incentive not to waste time did just that.

Especially as the Tories have a massive majority.

I suspect he fas that outside forces may interfere. They don't want someone making the decision of 'No No-deal Brexit' to bbe challenged in the supreme court. That bill has already passed the HoC but they want to avoid being challenged on what has always been Johnson's prefered option.

Picture of WA that took over 2 years to negotiate



Picture of CETA agreement ... and Johnson claims he can negotiate CETA + by November

Because there's no example of one done quickly and very many examples of ones that took years. In addition to Annetje's examples consider NAFTA.