Today, Amber Rudd has desperately tried to keep his position in the cabinet with Boris Johnson, saying that she would not "lie in front of bulldozers" to stop No Deal.

The secretary in charge of work and pensions admitted that she had changed position after leaving the EU without agreement, saying that "the circumstances had changed"

She said she no longer thought that a second referendum was preferable to No Deal, hinting that she was motivated by the prospect of continuing to do "good work" in her ministry.

The face of the flip appeared as Johnson's procession to Downing Street continued, with the leader presumed to be well ahead of rival Jeremy Hunt.

Johnson insisted Brexit was due before Oct. 31, "whatever happens", saying the impact of "No Deal" could be "extremely cheap" if the UK is preparing properly.

Ms. Rudd was previously one of the most powerful cabinet members, but she has significantly eased her opposition in recent weeks.

The US Secretary of Labor and Pensions, Amber Rudd, admitted that she had changed position after leaving the EU without agreement, saying "circumstances have changed".

Mr. Johnson (pictured at the Conservative roundup in Essex yesterday) insisted Brexit must take place before October 31st "whatever happens"

Interviewed today at the BBC's Andrew Marr television show, Ms. Rudd acknowledged that she had "pivoted" on the No Deal issue.

She spoke of the broader political situation with the rise of Brexit stating: "I accept that circumstances have also changed."

"I still think that no agreement would be bad for the economy, bad for security and bad for the Union," she said.

"But I have accepted the fact that we must now allow a no deal to be part of the leverage to make people make more compromises. That's what I'm doing. I'm doing a little more, I hope that the EU will make compromises and that the GRE will make compromises too. & # 39;

When asked if she still thought that a referendum would be a better option than the No Deal, Ms. Rudd replied, "I do not do it anymore.

& # 39; Because I think we have not exhausted all these options. We have considered the indicative votes, several votes on other ways to manage the expiry of Article 50, which now expires at the end of October, and I think that the best plan we have now is where: we do not leave any transaction as part of the leverage, but also recognize that nobody wants it. & # 39;

But she stressed that "nobody wants" any agreement, and suggested to the deputies to block it. "I still think Parliament could block a Brexit No Deal," she said.

She could not resist a glance at Boris Johnson, who had once promised that he would "lie down in front of bulldozers" to block the expansion of Heathrow – but was absent when he went to work. a trip to Afghanistan during the key vote.

"I do not say that I would sleep in front of the bulldozers if the (no transaction) happened," she said.

Ms. Rudd looked irritated when she was faced with a reproach from former Conservative colleague Nick Boles, who had pointed out his previous criticisms of Mr. Johnson during the referendum campaign, that he He was not the kind of person you wanted to "take you home".

Mr. Boles tweeted last week that Mrs. Rudd was clearly happy to be driven home by Mr. Johnson as long as she was in a "ministerial limousine".

Ms Rudd said today that Mr Boles has praised his reforms as the Secretary for Labor and Pensions. "That's what pushes me," she says.

Chancellor Philip Hammond warned that Britain would be at the mercy of Emmanuel Macron if there was no Brexit.

Mr Hammond rejected Johnson's claims that the UK could control the consequences of the failure to conclude an agreement with the EU – claiming that the bloc had " many levers "needed to minimize damage.

He said France could "delay" the delays in Calais to wreak chaos in ports like Dover.

Hammond is expected to leave the government next week, while Johnson is the big favorite to replace Theresa May as prime minister.

Philip Hammond (photo at number 11 last week) rejected Boris Johnson's claims that the UK can control the impact of No Deal

Philip Hammond (photo at number 11 last week) rejected Boris Johnson's claims that the UK can control the impact of No Deal

Mr. Hammond said that Emmanuel Macron (photographed in Paris last week) could simply "put on hold" the delays in Calais to wreak chaos in ports like Dover.

Mr. Hammond said that Emmanuel Macron (photographed in Paris last week) could simply "put on hold" the delays in Calais to wreak chaos in ports like Dover.

Anti-Brexit activists have also stepped up efforts to prevent Johnson from "bypassing" Parliament to pursue a Brexit without agreement.

Ms. Miller said that a letter from her legal team, addressed to Mr. Johnson, a Conservative leadership candidate, last week, warned him that it would go beyond his powers.

Speaking of the prospect of prorogation of Parliament on Sophy Ridge of Sky News on Sunday, moderated by Niall Paterson, she said: "We think that this goes beyond the powers of the Prime Minister, because parliamentary sovereignty is actually the jewel of the constitutional crown. according to the opinion and the case law we examined, closing the doors of Parliament suggests that it would go beyond the powers of a prime minister, it would be an abuse of its power to close Parliament, to pass through or not to pass, limit the voice of the representatives we all elect. & # 39;

Former Tory International Development Secretary, Priti Patel, who supports Mr Johnson, said that she was "not at all surprised" by any possible lawsuit, while "no money" would be needed. she opposed the "absolutely ruthless move to delay Brexit".

She told Sky News: "It is now up to the MPs and a new government to take real action, not third parties by going to court.

Anti-Brexit activist Gina Miller (pictured by Sky News today) has threatened to sue to prevent a prime minister from suspending parliament to force non-exchange

Anti-Brexit activist Gina Miller (pictured by Sky News today) has threatened to sue to prevent a prime minister from suspending parliament to force non-exchange

"I think it's exactly what it should have been just as well after 2016. After the referendum, the government was very clear at the time: the Brexit was Brexit and we were going to leave." # 39; EU.

"Instead, we had a whole range of third-party anti-Brexit organizations and positions that chose to go to court to defeat all of Brexit and to tie the hands of politicians, the government, and Parliament. .

"This is just not acceptable and the British people are really fed up with dying, he wants to see a government now, with renewed conviction, go out there and do exactly what he said that he will do, namely deliver the Brexit.

"This should not be about the semantics of Parliament, not just the votes in Parliament or the prorogation of Parliament. We must now support a new government.

.