Jump to content

The rise and fall of The SNP.


Guest

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 16.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Unknown user

    1077

  • jack D and coke

    795

  • manaliveits105

    705

  • Roxy Hearts

    648

2 hours ago, Auldbenches said:

But how does that reflect on Scotland as a country?  It is basically two politicians from the same party falling out.

Patel broke the ministerial code twice and got away with it.  Does that make the uk banana republic? 

You are happy to see this as something that reflects on the whole of Scottish politics because it suits your agenda. 

There is a lot more corruption in Westminster than up here but that means Scotland couldn't go it alone? 

 

As Salmond said the other day (and forgive me, I paraphrase)  :

the faults within the Crown office are no reflection on the actual Crown office, but on it's (present) leadership.

The failings within the Civil Service are not the fault of the service but of the (present) leadership.

The failures within Scotland's government is not the fault of Scotland but of it's (present) government.

 

I am inclined to agree with him.

It's not so much that Scotland is de facto a banana republic but it sure as Hell seems that the present government is trying to run it as one.

 

And, I don't believe I commented on this thread on Scotland's potential of going it alone, nor mention anything about Patel or Westminster. The subject of the thread is "the rise and fall of the SNP".

It's obviously your agenda to play a bit of whataboutery.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

They set holyrood up to foil the SNP. It was meant to ensure they never got this amount of power. 
#fail 

Galloway was saying it was a design fault the other day too :lol: 

Sarwar is soiled goods. Scottish Labour are ****ed until the day they attempt to engage with the possibility of independence.
You actually think someone would’ve seen that by now but they still have an arrogance that Scotland should be theirs. 

More years in the wilderness awaits and another few leaders to go through yet. 

 

Labour can't back independence. They do need to reinvent themselves however and find a candidate who can re engage with the unionists here in Scotland.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jack D and coke
Just now, AlimOzturk said:

 

Labour can't back independence. They do need to reinvent themselves however and find a candidate who can re engage with the unionists here in Scotland.  

It matters not who they put in charge for me bud. John Smith could be Scottish Labour leader and he’d be made to look a fool when their boss down south tells them what’s what. 
They need to accept that Scotland might want to leave the union. The point blank refusal to acknowledge this will see leader after leader binned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Give the guy a chance.

I'm.basing this in his performances in the referendum debates.  Thought he was terrible.  Be interesting to see if he is different as leader. He might've calmed down a wee bit by then

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Good point. Her behaviour with Israel was treasonous.

I'm not a fan of the SNP (I am pro indy) but everyone knows the driving force behind the media frenzy is a desperate desire to halt the advances in support for independence. That's not to say the guilty parties , whoever they are, shouldn't face the full force of the law. 

 

See here's the thing, what passes as our news media these days will basically report what is going on in politics and society in general, albeit with their owner's political slant applied.

However, the media never invented this deep seething hatred that now exists between Salmond and Sturgeon, nor the set of circumstances that brought it about. It is actual fact, and many within the SNP, the opposition, the civil service and generally those in the know, will - and have - happily vouch for that and comment on it.

If the former FM and present FM, both former allies from the same party, are in a virtual war with fall-out consequences up to and including conspiracies that could result in jail time, do you really expect the media to sit back and let them quietly sort it out? This is serious stuff and no media in the world would fail to report it. Well, apart from North Korea, certain Arab principalities, communist China...and banana republics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

They set holyrood up to foil the SNP. It was meant to ensure they never got this amount of power. 
#fail 

Galloway was saying it was a design fault the other day too :lol: 

Sarwar is soiled goods. Scottish Labour are ****ed until the day they attempt to engage with the possibility of independence.
You actually think someone would’ve seen that by now but they still have an arrogance that Scotland should be theirs. 

More years in the wilderness awaits and another few leaders to go through yet. 

Galloway saying it's a design fault while moving just over the border to try and keep himself relevant.  

He is now a tragic figure in uk politics.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

As Salmond said the other day (and forgive me, I paraphrase)  :

the faults within the Crown office are no reflection on the actual Crown office, but on it's (present) leadership.

The failings within the Civil Service are not the fault of the service but of the (present) leadership.

The failures within Scotland's government is not the fault of Scotland but of it's (present) government.

 

I am inclined to agree with him.

It's not so much that Scotland is de facto a banana republic but it sure as Hell seems that the present government is trying to run it as one.

 

And, I don't believe I commented on this thread on Scotland's potential of going it alone, nor mention anything about Patel or Westminster. The subject of the thread is "the rise and fall of the SNP".

It's obviously your agenda to play a bit of whataboutery.

 

 

 

 

I do think that Sturgeon and her other half have got this well wrong, even if it is just the handling of it.   

Making claims about Salmond's behaviour in a press conference was someone under pressure. 

They reckon that 90% of anger comes from guilt, maybe she knows what is round the corner. 

The leadership of the snp is to blame here.  

People weren't saying they were treating Scotland as a banana republic they claimed it is one because of this fall out.  

There is nothing going on within the snp that says that illustrates that Scotland couldn't go it alone.  Maybe other reasons, but claiming it because of two people is desperate.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Auldbenches said:

I do think that Sturgeon and her other half have got this well wrong, even if it is just the handling of it.   

Making claims about Salmond's behaviour in a press conference was someone under pressure. 

They reckon that 90% of anger comes from guilt, maybe she knows what is round the corner. 

The leadership of the snp is to blame here.  

People weren't saying they were treating Scotland as a banana republic they claimed it is one because of this fall out.  

There is nothing going on within the snp that says that illustrates that Scotland couldn't go it alone.  Maybe other reasons, but claiming it because of two people is desperate.  

 

 

There is a massive opportunity to reform our institutions and the relationship we have with Westminster. Leslie Evans is a Westminster appointment and is in effect put into her position as Permanent Secretary to oversee the work of the FM and the SG. It seems to me that the FM and others have been seriously compromised by her actions. Just like the Lord Advocate it seems she is answerable to nobody certainly not the parliament which she has treated with contempt.

 

         Parliament and this enquiry seem scared of the truth and only Jackie Baillie has shown any ability to approach it as far as i can see. Its not the fall out that's making us appear like a banana republic its the lack of fairness and functionality in our institutions including parliament where they are running scared of the power they do have because they dont want to face up to their responsibilities. They dont know what to do about anything and the FM has been taking the line of least resistace for far too long. This was never the case under Salmond where all our performance indicators were good and he and the SG led on all sorts of matters rather than being forced to react to events that they should have anticipated.

    

       Sturgeon is gone or Scotland is done.

 

            

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Auldbenches said:

I do think that Sturgeon and her other half have got this well wrong, even if it is just the handling of it.   

Making claims about Salmond's behaviour in a press conference was someone under pressure. 

They reckon that 90% of anger comes from guilt, maybe she knows what is round the corner. 

The leadership of the snp is to blame here.  

People weren't saying they were treating Scotland as a banana republic they claimed it is one because of this fall out.  

There is nothing going on within the snp that says that illustrates that Scotland couldn't go it alone.  Maybe other reasons, but claiming it because of two people is desperate.  

 

 

I think it was Andrew Neil who first coined the banana republic phrase. One headline read :

 

ANDREW NEIL: Censorship, bullying, threats of jail... how Nicola Sturgeon's storm troops turned Scotland into a banana republic without the bananas


I think you are splitting hairs here by suggesting that he is doing down Scotland in it's entirety, all aspects of Scotland, including every last one of us.

Nor do I think you are doing it by accident, it's a well worn path for pro-indy supporters to travel : any criticism of Sturgeon, the SNP or the indy movement is automatically portrayed as an attack on Scotland itself, which you are entitled to believe if you wish. But what I read was him talking with Sturgeon and her cronies very much within his sights.

 

I sense that you, like other Sturgeon/indy supporters elsewhere, have real fears that she will not survive this crisis and are already changing the narrative in anticipation of that to one of - well we don't need Sturgeon for independence, it can still happen without her.

 

This of course may well be true, but the will it/won't it aspect only greatly adds to the whole spectacle for everyone. 

 

...and I agree 100% that the outburst at the covid briefing was ill-advised at best petulant, nasty and distasteful in it's insinuation. Possibly a sign that we could see fireworks on Wednesday is she cant keep her temper under control. 

Edited by JDK2020
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

I think it was Andrew Neil who first coined the banana republic phrase. One headline read :

 

ANDREW NEIL: Censorship, bullying, threats of jail... how Nicola Sturgeon's storm troops turned Scotland into a banana republic without the bananas


I think you are splitting hairs here by suggesting that he is doing down Scotland in it's entirety, all aspects of Scotland, including every last one of us.

Nor do I think you are doing it by accident, it's a well worn path for pro-indy supporters to travel : any criticism of Sturgeon, the SNP or the indy movement is automatically portrayed as an attack on Scotland itself, which you are entitled to believe if you wish. But what I read was him talking with Sturgeon and her cronies very much within his sights.

 

I sense that you, like other Sturgeon/indy supporters elsewhere, have real fears that she will not survive this crisis and are already changing the narrative in anticipation of that to one of - well we don't need Sturgeon for independence, it can still happen without her.

 

This of course may well be true, but the will it/won't it aspect only greatly adds to the whole spectacle for everyone. 

 

 

Are they Nicola Sturgeon's storm troops? I don't think they are, what proof or reasoning do you or Neil have for this assertion?

 

If you think criticism of Sturgeon is being manufactured by all ndy supporters as a criticism of Scotland then you are not keeping up with events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

I think it was Andrew Neil who first coined the banana republic phrase. One headline read :

 

ANDREW NEIL: Censorship, bullying, threats of jail... how Nicola Sturgeon's storm troops turned Scotland into a banana republic without the bananas


I think you are splitting hairs here by suggesting that he is doing down Scotland in it's entirety, all aspects of Scotland, including every last one of us.

Nor do I think you are doing it by accident, it's a well worn path for pro-indy supporters to travel : any criticism of Sturgeon, the SNP or the indy movement is automatically portrayed as an attack on Scotland itself, which you are entitled to believe if you wish. But what I read was him talking with Sturgeon and her cronies very much within his sights.

 

I sense that you, like other Sturgeon/indy supporters elsewhere, have real fears that she will not survive this crisis and are already changing the narrative in anticipation of that to one of - well we don't need Sturgeon for independence, it can still happen without her.

 

This of course may well be true, but the will it/won't it aspect only greatly adds to the whole spectacle for everyone. 

 

...and I agree 100% that the outburst at the covid briefing was ill-advised at best petulant, nasty and distasteful in it's insinuation. Possibly a sign that we could see fireworks on Wednesday is she cant keep her temper under control. 

If I'm splitting hairs it isn't intentionally.  The post that included the phrase wasn't worded like that.  

This night be the issue that makes sure that our politics stays as clean as possible. 

If Salmond has any substantial evidence then she is gone.  

I think her comments about his behaviour sounded like someone against the ropes.  Their own doing by not cooperating with the enquiry. 

All our institutions need cleaned up.  Look at the money paid out to the rangers administrators.  That and tbe PPE contracts down south show that they are all the same.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

Are they Nicola Sturgeon's storm troops? I don't think they are, what proof or reasoning do you or Neil have for this assertion?

 

If you think criticism of Sturgeon is being manufactured by all ndy supporters as a criticism of Scotland then you are not keeping up with events.

 

If you think that's what I said then you are not keeping up with events, with all due respect, but TBH, I don't quite get what you are saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Auldbenches said:

If I'm splitting hairs it isn't intentionally.  The post that included the phrase wasn't worded like that.  

This night be the issue that makes sure that our politics stays as clean as possible. 

If Salmond has any substantial evidence then she is gone.  

I think her comments about his behaviour sounded like someone against the ropes.  Their own doing by not cooperating with the enquiry. 

All our institutions need cleaned up.  Look at the money paid out to the rangers administrators.  That and tbe PPE contracts down south show that they are all the same.  

 

 

Agreed, she is very much against the ropes, and the post from someone above regarding this second inquiry that Salmond is scheduled for (with James Hamilton QC on Monday or Tuesday) could pile further pressure on her. 

Could be an interesting week ahead.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon Sailor
24 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

Agreed, she is very much against the ropes, and the post from someone above regarding this second inquiry that Salmond is scheduled for (with James Hamilton QC on Monday or Tuesday) could pile further pressure on her. 

Could be an interesting week ahead.

 

 

She is against the ropes but her head never stays still when she talks so it will be hard to land the punches.

 

She is also a master of deflection and creating ambiguity. Fully expect to hear a few " to the best of my knowledges " and " as far as I was awares " in her answers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JDK2020 said:

 

If you think that's what I said then you are not keeping up with events, with all due respect, but TBH, I don't quite get what you are saying.

 

I'm saying the biggest criticism of Sturgeon is coming from the Indy movement. I thought you were saying that was not the case when you said this of Indy supporters "any criticism of Sturgeon, the SNP or the indy movement is automatically portrayed as an attack on Scotland itself,"

 

I'm also saying that this debacle is not entirely the fault of Sturgeon and most of it is not done at her behest hence my comment on "Nicola's Storm troops". She should and will carry the can though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

I'm saying the biggest criticism of Sturgeon is coming from the Indy movement. I thought you were saying that was not the case when you said this of Indy supporters "any criticism of Sturgeon, the SNP or the indy movement is automatically portrayed as an attack on Scotland itself,"

 

I'm also saying that this debacle is not entirely the fault of Sturgeon and most of it is not done at her behest hence my comment on "Nicola's Storm troops". She should and will carry the can though.

 

My apologies for any misunderstanding on my part.

 

I believe it is true that most, if not all, criticism of Sturgeon, the SNP or the independence movement is deliberately construed by sturgeon/snp/indy supporters as being criticism of Scotland itself. I see it incessantly, this need to lump the former with the latter.

 

I disagree that it is not entirely the fault of Sturgeon as she seems to be in absolute control of every aspect of SNP policy, hence the lack of any real talent within the party. She is IMO a real control freak and there are no significant policies or  attitudes encouraged unless originated or sanctioned by her. Numerous commentators from within and outwith the SNP have commented to that effect. (actually thinking more on this I will suggest that quite possibly her "hubbie" has a great deal of say on what goes and what doesn't)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, pablo said:

 

Was there a particular reason for posting this?

 

It's just that I have seen people elsewhere on different sites claim that Leslie Evans was a "Westminster appointment" and further suggesting that it was "proof" that she was some sort of Trojan horse appointment and that she instigated the court action against Salmond against Sturgeon's wishes.

Which is of course laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

Was there a particular reason for posting this?

 

It's just that I have seen people elsewhere on different sites claim that Leslie Evans was a "Westminster appointment" and further suggesting that it was "proof" that she was some sort of Trojan horse appointment and that she instigated the court action against Salmond against Sturgeon's wishes.

Which is of course laughable.

 

That was exactly my reason, thank you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Zlatanable said:

The thing that disturbs me is your entire effort to wipe my character as a human being. I have never done that to other human beings, and I won't.

 

And on a thread full of absolute nonsense from you, this is the biggest pile of all. You have done, and continue to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, pablo said:

 

That was exactly my reason, thank you. 

 

I suspected as much, as suddenly Sturgeonites were awash with shouts of "mole".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga

Wednesday will be very interesting, from point of view of level of questions asked of NS and the answers she will provide. Depending on that, Salmond will then have to decide what next steps are, but I doubt he will be walking away. 

Damage already being seen in polls and it could get worse yet. 

For what it's worth, and that isn't a lot, I don't see NS as driving force behind this, it's her husband who is in control of SNP leadership and its him who should be facing music. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Auldbenches
3 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

And on a thread full of absolute nonsense from you, this is the biggest pile of all. You have done, and continue to do.

 

1 hour ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

Posters picking on an Autistic person bunch of wanks. Notice its all the mods pets getting away with it. Utter classless behaviour expected from tim malloys or hobos.

 

Im a parent to an autistic kid seems to be no remorse or understanding. Sometimes need to break down things or explain them in detail for these people. Keep up posts Zlatan i for one enjoy reading yours

Only saw the poster say he was autistic in a post yesterday.  Anyone having a dig after he declared is well out order. 

Don't know why I've quoted justin z.  Wasn't meant to  

 

Edited by Auldbenches
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

Posters picking on an Autistic person bunch of wanks. Notice its all the mods pets getting away with it. Utter classless behaviour expected from tim malloys or hobos.

 

Im a parent to an autistic kid seems to be no remorse or understanding. Sometimes need to break down things or explain them in detail for these people. Keep up posts Zlatan i for one enjoy reading yours

This is an Internet forum anyone can be anyone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicola Sturgeon - "the behaviour they complained of was found by a jury not to constitute criminal conduct and Alex Salmond is innocent of criminality. But that doesn't mean the behaviour they complained of didn't happen."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Wednesday will be very interesting, from point of view of level of questions asked of NS and the answers she will provide. Depending on that, Salmond will then have to decide what next steps are, but I doubt he will be walking away. 

Damage already being seen in polls and it could get worse yet. 

For what it's worth, and that isn't a lot, I don't see NS as driving force behind this, it's her husband who is in control of SNP leadership and its him who should be facing music. 

 

According to John Curtice, he believes that the impact this is having on opinion polls is yet to be seen and that the recent negative trend (from a Separatist/Leave perspective) is down to Sturgeon's handling of the pandemic not being seen as positively as it previously was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga
4 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Nicola Sturgeon - "the behaviour they complained of was found by a jury not to constitute criminal conduct and Alex Salmond is innocent of criminality. But that doesn't mean the behaviour they complained of didn't happen."

 

 

Totally out of order by Sturgeon and could be construed as slander. Desperately trying to throw mud at Salmond and hoping some sticks. Wonder if he will respond. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unknown user
2 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Totally out of order by Sturgeon and could be construed as slander. Desperately trying to throw mud at Salmond and hoping some sticks. Wonder if he will respond. 

 

Hardly, the man himself admitted inappropriate behaviour, she's acknowledging that and that it was deemed not to be criminal.

 

No such thing as slander in Scotland by the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga
3 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Hardly, the man himself admitted inappropriate behaviour, she's acknowledging that and that it was deemed not to be criminal.

 

No such thing as slander in Scotland by the way.

Didn't know about the slander in Scotland thing. 

On the other hand, that's not how I or others see her comments. In my view, she is muck slinging and questioning verdict, in your view she isn't. Different opinions and nothing wrong with that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unknown user
21 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Didn't know about the slander in Scotland thing. 

On the other hand, that's not how I or others see her comments. In my view, she is muck slinging and questioning verdict, in your view she isn't. Different opinions and nothing wrong with that. 

She's being entirely factual, there isn't a court in the land that could pull her up on that.

 

Slander and libel are in English law btw, the equivalent in Scots law would be defamation 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Smithee said:

She's being entirely factual, there isn't a court in the land that could pull her up on that.

 

Slander and libel are in English law btw, the equivalent in Scots law would be defamation 👍

It's basically all the same thing

 

Slander is a transient form of defamation and libel is a permanent form of defamation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Nicola Sturgeon - "the behaviour they complained of was found by a jury not to constitute criminal conduct and Alex Salmond is innocent of criminality. But that doesn't mean the behaviour they complained of didn't happen."

 

So they (the complainants)  made a complaint to the police about what he allegedly had done to them which is complaining about his behaviour to them. 
He was found not guilty but admitted his behaviour wasn’t as bad as they made it out to be. 
 

Sturgeon then claims his behaviour did not constitute criminal conduct but that doesn’t mean the behaviour they complained about didn’t happen. 
 

She called into question the courts and the jury by finding him not guilty. 


 

The term people should use is defamation. 
 

https://www.gov.scot/publications/defamation-scots-law-consultation/pages/4/

 

Sturgeons big problem with that statement may not lie with Salmond but with the courts. The court might see her statement as questioning the integrity of law and the jury from a position of high office.
I’m not sure if that is the case in this instance. 

Edited by Boy Daniel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Candy said:

Apparently the Greens will be backing the no confidence motion in John Swinney

Let’s hope you are right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Byyy The Light
15 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

 

Nicola Sturgeon - "the behaviour they complained of was found by a jury not to constitute criminal conduct and Alex Salmond is innocent of criminality. But that doesn't mean the behaviour they complained of didn't happen."

 

So they (the complainants)  made a complaint to the police about what he allegedly had done to them which is complaining about his behaviour to them. 
He was found not guilty but admitted his behaviour wasn’t as bad as they made it out to be. 
 

Sturgeon then claims his behaviour did not constitute criminal conduct but that doesn’t mean the behaviour they complained about didn’t happen. 
 

She called into question the courts and the jury by finding him not guilty. 


 

The term people should use is defamation. 
 

https://www.gov.scot/publications/defamation-scots-law-consultation/pages/4/

 

Sturgeons big problem with that statement may not lie with Salmond but with the courts. The court might see her statement as questioning the integrity of law and the jury from a position of high office.
I’m not sure if that is the case in this instance. 


I’m no Sturgeon fan boy but I can’t see how you arrive at all this. For me all she’s saying is the accusations weren’t a fabrication. Something happened, it just wasn’t deemed criminal.

 

Salmond himself admitted that his sleepy cuddles were not appropriate behaviour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

Nicola Sturgeon - "the behaviour they complained of was found by a jury not to constitute criminal conduct and Alex Salmond is innocent of criminality. But that doesn't mean the behaviour they complained of didn't happen."

 

 

 

So, in a nutshell, if Sturgeon decrees that she did nothing wrong then that is it?  😆 

FFS, imagine for one second if the roles had been reversed, how she would react to that sort of BS. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smithee said:

Hardly, the man himself admitted inappropriate behaviour, she's acknowledging that and that it was deemed not to be criminal.

 

 

 

 

Lol, Why even bother with juries?

Let's just in future have the Chief Mammy, and she alone, decide on who walks and who swings from the nearest lamp-post, and she can just throw it in while she's performing in one of her daily pandemic meetings.

No that would be megalomaniac behaviour, erm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Byyy The Light said:


I’m no Sturgeon fan boy but I can’t see how you arrive at all this. For me all she’s saying is the accusations weren’t a fabrication. Something happened, it just wasn’t deemed criminal.

 

Salmond himself admitted that his sleepy cuddles were not appropriate behaviour.


 She is claiming that the behaviour the complaints levelled against him happened. The behaviour they complained about was he tried to rape them or something similar he was found not guilty of that. 
This is the killer line in her statement.

“But that doesn't mean the behaviour they complained of didn't happen."

She basically saying the behaviour of Salmond which he went to court for and was found not guilty of did happen. 
 

Im sure in the fullness of time this statement will be legally assessed as it will be investigated by either a court or a parliamentary committee or other body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smithee said:

She's being entirely factual, there isn't a court in the land that could pull her up on that.

 

Slander and libel are in English law btw, the equivalent in Scots law would be defamation 👍

 

Lol, well according to the media there's many a legal eagle was stunned by the implications of what she suggested.

 

But let's listen instead to some gadge on a fitba forum.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Byyy The Light
15 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:


 She is claiming that the behaviour the complaints levelled against him happened. The behaviour they complained about was he tried to rape them or something similar he was found not guilty of that. 
This is the killer line in her statement.

“But that doesn't mean the behaviour they complained of didn't happen."

She basically saying the behaviour of Salmond which he went to court for and was found not guilty of did happen. 
 

Im sure in the fullness of time this statement will be legally assessed as it will be investigated by either a court or a parliamentary committee or other body.


There were considerably more charges than just the rape accusations. I’m not interested in getting in to the semantics of it so we can agree to disagree.  I personally don’t believe Salmond did nothing wrong but that’s my opinion. There are numerous shades of grey in what’s criminal, what can be proven or explained away as drunken errors of judgement.

 

Not linked to this case but I have very close connections to someone who works in these circles and her first few weeks in the job were learning which ministers to make sure you don’t get left alone with on a one to one basis and who to avoid speaking to, from her boss. 
 

As I said, that doesn’t mean Salmond is criminally guilty but the culture in that place sounds horrendous. People leave rather than speak up, I can’t imagine why!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unknown user
29 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

Lol, well according to the media there's many a legal eagle was stunned by the implications of what she suggested.

 

But let's listen instead to some gadge on a fitba forum.

You can be into my opinion or not, I'm not arsed either way, but the fact remains that what she said was entirely factual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Australis said:

Looking tonight that Sturgeon is going to be quite happy throwing John Swinney under the bus?

 

 

 

 

 

Another ex best friend coming along shortly then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon Sailor
35 minutes ago, Australis said:

Looking tonight that Sturgeon is going to be quite happy throwing John Swinney under the bus?

 

Always wondered why the 35 gets diverted past Holyrood quite often

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Byyy The Light said:


There were considerably more charges than just the rape accusations. I’m not interested in getting in to the semantics of it so we can agree to disagree.  I personally don’t believe Salmond did nothing wrong but that’s my opinion. There are numerous shades of grey in what’s criminal, what can be proven or explained away as drunken errors of judgement.

 

Not linked to this case but I have very close connections to someone who works in these circles and her first few weeks in the job were learning which ministers to make sure you don’t get left alone with on a one to one basis and who to avoid speaking to, from her boss. 
 

As I said, that doesn’t mean Salmond is criminally guilty but the culture in that place sounds horrendous. People leave rather than speak up, I can’t imagine why!

 

 

 

I have always thought Salmond was a sleazy b'stard, and still do.

The fact is though it looks like he was stitched up, and that is not the way for the people running the country to behave. Sturgeon has only worsened matters for herself with that stupid, ill-advised statement born out of sheer petulance during one of her covid briefings, of all things.

That is no way for a First Minister to behave.

Not only does it belittle her position it also raises the spectre of her doubting the capability, judgement and integrity of the members of the jury.

Then there's the real possibility of ensuing court action and the complainants having to go through everything all over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Byyy The Light
6 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

I have always thought Salmond was a sleazy b'stard, and still do.

The fact is though it looks like he was stitched up, and that is not the way for the people running the country to behave. Sturgeon has only worsened matters for herself with that stupid, ill-advised statement born out of sheer petulance during one of her covid briefings, of all things.

That is no way for a First Minister to behave.

Not only does it belittle her position it also raises the spectre of her doubting the capability, judgement and integrity of the members of the jury.

Then there's the real possibility of ensuing court action and the complainants having to go through everything all over again.


Well hopefully it doesn’t come to that. I’d like some adults running the country and not this tinpot playground cabal we’ve got going on at the moment.

 

The same goes for the dribbling buffoon and his crooked pals in Westminster. The state of the place, honestly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon Sailor

What a conniving lot this current Scottish government are.

 

It stems from one person who is absolute poison. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...