Being kept in touch about what was happening is not the same as agreeing with it.
Being kept in touch does not mean they didn't fight against it the whole way.

OK then, what about William Calley who was convicted of premeditated murder for his role in the My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam war. Thanks to an intervention by president Nixon his life sentence was reduced to four and a half years. The reaction in America strikes me as hypocritical.

That is why I said it might have been "acceptance".

We don't know that agreed or disagreed. We don't know if they fought against it the whole way.

That isn't the point.

The point is their reaction that it was out of the blue is disingenuous at best. To pretend that they weren't fully kept in the loop is less than honest. Of course it was no different than any other politician would do.

Oil!

I think that fight would have been considerably louder and more apparent if it had happened.

The whole thing is about damage limitation.

I know it's a bit TFH but I think even the concept of a trade deal is a smoke screen.

It appears to me that the entire purpose of the exercise was to prevent Al-Megrahi getting an appeal because of what would have been revealed in that case.

If this sounds far fetched then have click on this.

Never thought of that angle. Interesting possibility. You just never know.