Jump to content

The rise and fall of The SNP.


Zlatanable

Recommended Posts

On 12/02/2021 at 21:23, JyTees said:

 

Bigotry. You really are a wukfit!

giphy.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Space Mackerel

    640

  • jack D and coke

    340

  • ri Alban

    306

  • Pans Jambo

    277

1 hour ago, Justin Z said:

 

This is the widely accepted international legal position, yes.

 

A startlingly strong starting point in post-independence vote negotiations.

Yep. 👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/02/2021 at 11:02, Famous 1874 said:

SNP days are numbered in Scotland, 14 years of absolutely ****ing shite bar a couple of good things intertwined amongst the catastrophic shambles that they have created. Thankfully there is enough educated people in Scotland to see past their division creating ploy and numerous failures. Sturgeon has to go asap, an utter disgrace during this pandemic. 

You forgot the IMO at the end of your rant 🤔

The general view both North and South of the border is she has performed better than the other UK politicians. 

A few dozen 'traditional' Hearts fans on a social media site don't really count. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
6 minutes ago, luckydug said:

You forgot the IMO at the end of your rant 🤔

The general view both North and South of the border is she has performed better than the other UK politicians. 

A few dozen 'traditional' Hearts fans on a social media site don't really count. 

 

 

:rofl:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

No you're right, intermediate steps are always preferable to bloody revolution. ;)

 

I suppose my positions on such things have become much more fluid, and as a consequence more simplistic, since I no longer have the time to commit to thorough thought and research.

 

You'd have to admit though, in human terms at least, the border between Scotland and England is nonsensical.

 

My beef with nationalism/seperatism (two different animals which are often conflated, both by the confused, and in order to confuse), is that it can distort our view of our real enemies.

 

Spot on, Gov.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if this statement from 2015  on education will come back to haunt the FM

 

Ms Sturgeon added: “Let me be clear – I want to be judged on this. If you are not, as First Minister, prepared to put your neck on the line on the education of our young people then what are you prepared to. It really matters.”

 
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Candy said:

I wonder if this statement from 2015  on education will come back to haunt the FM

 

Ms Sturgeon added: “Let me be clear – I want to be judged on this. If you are not, as First Minister, prepared to put your neck on the line on the education of our young people then what are you prepared to. It really matters.”

 

It’s unlikely to come back to haunt her as we have useless opposition parties and a compliant media, neither of which ask her difficult questions.

If it does become an issue (as it should) she’ll make sure it’s Swinney’s neck that’s on the line, unless Murrell can cook up a plan to blame Salmond.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Konrad von Carstein
14 minutes ago, weehammy said:

It’s unlikely to come back to haunt her as we have useless opposition parties and a compliant media, neither of which ask her difficult questions.

If it does become an issue (as it should) she’ll make sure it’s Swinney’s neck that’s on the line, unless Murrell can cook up a plan to blame Salmond.

 

 

:cornette:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, weehammy said:

It’s unlikely to come back to haunt her as we have useless opposition parties and a compliant media, neither of which ask her difficult questions.

If it does become an issue (as it should) she’ll make sure it’s Swinney’s neck that’s on the line, unless Murrell can cook up a plan to blame Salmond.

 

So bitter 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some people should actually read papers published for Scottish born eyes. Tho, I do wish they'd published the English eyes versions up here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
4 hours ago, ri Alban said:

I think some people should actually read papers published for Scottish born eyes. Tho, I do wish they'd published the English eyes versions up here. 

 

I do look forward to the early morning racist ravings of our resident HooseBuddie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

I do look forward to the early morning racist ravings of our resident HooseBuddie.


This. Seething there were no gifs this morning. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
manaliveits105

Sturgeon said she would only do her talking at the inquiry but has now given an interview to stv to pre-empt Ecks appearance - just claiming innocence basically but she obviously didn’t think it would happen and now has the jitters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking to the BBC and STV in broadcast interviews, Ms Sturgeon said it was time for her predecessor to “replace the insinuation and assertion” with evidence, something she believes he cannot do.

In a pre-emptive move before her former friend and ally’s evidence session, the First Minister said Mr Salmond had told her “in quite gory detail” the nature of the complaints against him during a meeting in her home on April 2, 2018.

 

Adding that the burden of proof was on Mr Salmond, Ms Sturgeon said she was “relieved” to be giving evidence next week.

Mr Salmond is set to appear in front of the inquiry on Wednesday following a decision by the Scottish Parliament’s Corporate Body to publish a revised evidence submission.

The decision followed a court challenge by The Spectator magazine on the scope of a court order around Mr Salmond’s trial and after two votes to block its publication by the committee.

Ms Sturgeon is set to give her evidence to the committee next week.

She said: “This week I hope Alex Salmond will turn up to the committee and bring the claims he has been making out into the open.

"He appears to be suggesting some kind of conspiracy or concerted campaign against him without a shred of evidence.

"This is his opportunity, because the burden of proof lies with him, to replace the insinuation and assertion that we’ve heard over several months now with evidence.

"Now I don’t believe he can do that because I know what he is claiming about a conspiracy is not true.

"But if he can’t substantiate it, it is time for him to stop making these claims because it is not fair to women first and foremost who came forward with complaints or the other people who have given loyal service to Alex Salmond who he also appears to be directing those claims to."

Asked about whether she stood by her assertion to Parliament that she first came to know about the complaints during the meeting with Mr Salmond in April, Ms Sturgeon said she stood by what she said.

Pressed on whether a meeting with Geoff Aberdein, the former chief of staff to Mr Salmond, included details of the complaints, the First Minister said the meeting “never held any significance”.

She said: “I stand by what I said to Parliament and I’ll set out the detail of this to the committee. 

"On April 2, 2018, Alex Salmond came to my house and told me in quite gory detail what he was accused of and also gave me his account of one of those incidents.

"There has since been an issue raised about a meeting I had with his former chief of staff three days earlier.

"That’s a meeting that’s never held any significance in my head. My recollection of that I will give to the committee, but it doesn’t change what I’ve said to Parliament.

"I will share all of that with the committee and I relish the opportunity to do that. Many claims have been made about me that are legitimate questions that I have to answer. I am rightly and properly subjected to scrutiny.”

Questioned on the suggestion her husband and SNP chief executive Peter Murrell did not know about the April 2 meeting, Ms Sturgeon said she did not share the details of the meeting.

She said: “He didn't know because he wasn't at the meeting and I didn't share the details with him. I'll get into all of this with the committee, that's for next week.

"I look forward to the opportunity. I'm not pretending it will be an enjoyable experience, but it's a welcome opportunity to set the record straight.”

Admitting the Scottish Government had made mistakes in its handling of the complaints, the First Minister said it was up to other people to “make up their own minds” on her conduct, but that she would “refute the allegations that have been made against me”.

Ms Sturgeon was also asked whether the development of the policy, which took place as senior civil servants were aware of potential complaints against Mr Salmond, was directed towards her predecessor. The First Minister said that was not the context of the policy.

She said: “I had a lingering suspicion because of the Sky query about Edinburgh Airport, but what I’ve set out to Parliament I stand by in terms of when I became aware of the specific Scottish Government complaints.

“The committee has already heard from the senior official who was charged with drawing up that policy that he actually looked at the pre-existing policies, decided there was a gap in terms of former ministers.

"The idea back then that this was about Alex Salmond rather than the global MeToo movement that everybody, organisations the world over were reviewing their policies, making sure that past deficiencies where women felt they couldn’t come forward, particularly about historic complaints, that we were trying to rectify that.

"That was the context of the development of this policy, not Alex Salmond.”

Asked whether Leslie Evans, the permanent secretary, still commanded her confidence, Ms Sturgeon said she expected the civil servant to remain in post until her term finishes.

She said: “Yes, I do and I think it is important that everybody involved in this has the ability to answer questions as she has done before the committee on a number of occasions.”

Ms Sturgeon added: "Leslie Evans is going to be permanent secretary. Her term of office comes to an end in about a year’s time or such like. My expectation is that Leslie Evans will continue until then to be permanent secretary.”


https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-accuses-alex-salmond-of-not-having-a-shred-of-evidence-to-back-up-conspiracy-allegations-3143091

Link to post
Share on other sites
manaliveits105
2 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

Preparations already being made across Scotland for Wednesday. 

 

 

th-4.jpeg

Gonna need a bigger box !!

Edited by manaliveits105
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/02/2021 at 14:38, luckydug said:

You forgot the IMO at the end of your rant 🤔

The general view both North and South of the border is she has performed better than the other UK politicians. 

A few dozen 'traditional' Hearts fans on a social media site don't really count. 

 

 

 

Performed better on the telly? So, OK her PR is slick, but what has she actually achieved?

Edited by JDK2020
Link to post
Share on other sites

“The evidence supports a deliberate, prolonged, malicious & concerted effort amongst a range of individuals in Scot Govt & SNP to damage my reputation, even to extent of having me imprisoned.” 

 

“Mr Murrell (SNP chief Exec & husband of Nicola Sturgeon) deployed his senior staff to recruit & persuade staff & ex-staff to submit police complaints... clear that any supporting evidence establishing this point was not shared with committee by Crown Office. Why?”

 

Resignations? Nah. Jail terms please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not holding back. 

 

Needs to focus on the technical aspects like turning down mediation and failing to record meetings. That's usually what wins these sort of things. Harder to prove a conspiracy. Though not sure what 'winning'  means here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone had set me up in the way Eck was set up, I'd be all fire and brimstone as well.

 

Sturgeon and Peter Murrell can feckin :bolt:

Edited by Cruyff
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

looks like Crown Office may have been got at by the Murrells legal team to get Parliamentary Committee to remove and redact Alexs submission again :interehjrling:

 

That’s indeed what I suspect has happened 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, manaliveits105 said:

looks like Crown Office may have been got at by the Murrells legal team to get Parliamentary Committee to remove and redact Alexs submission again :interehjrling:

 

 

Fine line in helping identify the women complainers.

 

Naming some people helps identify them.

 

But its right it's been published. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Boy Daniel said:

 

Not any more.

 

Documents have been removed.

 

Edited version back on later. No one knows yet if Salmond will pull out. 

Edited by Mikey1874
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Not any more.

 

Documents have been removed.

 

Edited version back on later. No one knows yet if Salmond will pull out. 

I’m sure someone will have copied them before they were removed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not keen at all of Salmond

 

But surely after all the accusations fired at him and then being found not guilty of them all by a jury full of females, he should be allowed to give his side of the story?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

I’m sure someone will have copied them before they were removed. 

 

The point seems to be that the Committee can only use what has been published. And Salmond can only talk about what has been published.

 

Its censorship. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

The point seems to be that the Committee can only use what has been published. And Salmond can only talk about what has been published.

 

Its censorship. 

If that’s the case then we can expect Salmond to refuse to appear again. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
manaliveits105

The lord advocate is the chief legal officer of the Scottish government and  the crown

Walter James Wolffe QC is a senior Scottish lawyer who has served as Lord Advocate since 1st June 2016. He was appointed by the current First Minister.:cornette_dog:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, manaliveits105 said:

For Sturgeons Scotland think Putins Russia - Alex better get his after shave bottles checked out

He's not appearing tomorrow.  The country is heading towards banana republic territory.  Thankfully, Alex Salmond is a lot smarter than Sturgeon and I do look forward to his press conference 😎

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem sturgeon has now is that the cat is out the bag as far as Salmond’s submissions are concerned. They are out there and there’s no point in trying to redact them now. 
Any journalist worth their salt will challenge the FM about her take on the “facts” at every opportunity

Edited by Boy Daniel
Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Scotsman.

 

The former first minister confirmed tonight he would not give evidence to the committee in person tomorrow following their decision to delete, redact, and republish his revised submission on the potential ministerial code breach by Nicola Sturgeon.

It came as the Scottish Parliament was threatened with criminal proceedings by the Crown Office if it did not redact Mr Salmond’s key evidence.

Sign up to our Politics newsletter

It is understood that Mr Salmond has offered this coming Friday as an alternative day to appear in front of the committee, with the refusal to attend tomorrow due to the legal difficulties arising from the decision to redact his evidence on the ministerial code.

This offer will be discussed at tomorrow’s private meeting of the committee.

In a letter from his legal team to the committee seen by The Scotsman, Mr Salmond’s team said the redactions to his evidence have “created a significant legal impediment to his oral evidence”.

The letter adds that the committee convener, Linda Fabiani, rejected the suggestion of a meeting to discuss the scenario, labelling it unproductive and promising written guidance instead.

Responding, Mr Salmond’s legal team state: “As it happens, no such written guidance has been sent to us in spite of the fact that we have been asking for this for months.

“Neither we nor our client can see how a meeting to discuss the parameters of his evidence could be anything other than productive or helpful.

"It is now clearly impossible for him to attend tomorrow in these circumstances, but he remains willing to attend on Friday. He accepts that is entirely in the hands of the committee to whom he has asked that we copy this correspondence.”

An Scottish Parliament spokesperson said: “Mr Salmond has informed the Committee that he will not be attending tomorrow’s meeting to give evidence. The Committee will instead meet in private to discuss the implications of Mr Salmond’s response and the next steps for its work.”

Non-publication of Mr Salmond’s evidence was previously understood to be the final hurdle stopping the former leader of the SNP from giving evidence.

The issue was thought to have been overcome when the Scottish Parliament’s Corporate Body (SPCB) overturned two votes by the harassment complaints committee to publish the evidence.

However, the Crown Office’s intervention and parliament’s resulting redactions led to an warning from Mr Salmond’s legal team that the move could lead to his withdrawal.

In a letter to the committee, David McKie of Levy and McRae warned convener Linda Fabiani that the redactions could “have a material bearing on whether he is able to attend tomorrow”.

It continued: “As matters stand, we have advised him that the apparent intervention from the Crown suggests that there has to be a material risk to him in speaking to his submission. He cannot be placed in legal jeopardy.”

In response, the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour demanded the head of the Crown Office, James Wolffe QC, give an urgent statement to parliament on the fiasco on Wednesday.

Jackie Baillie, the interim leader of Scottish Labour, said he and Crown Agent David Harvie must appear in Holyrood and called for the publication of the letter from the Crown to the SPCB.

She said: “Too much time and money has been spent on this sordid tale. The committee must be able to get on with its work, unobstructed and without information being inappropriately withheld.”

The harassment complaints committee is examining the botched handling of harassment complaints against Mr Salmond by the Scottish Government, which led to a £500,000 legal bill after the Government conceded a judicial review challenge on the grounds of the process being “tainted by apparent bias”.

Mr Salmond was also acquitted of sexual offence charges in a trial last year.

Nicola Sturgeon is expected to give evidence next week.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

The problem sturgeon has now is that the cat is out the bag as far as Salmond’s submissions are concerned. They are out there and there’s no point in trying to redact them now. 
Any journalist worth their salt will challenge the FM about her take on the “facts” at every opportunity


Do you think any journalist here will ask her anything? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotten to the core.

 

It's no surprise there's suddenly a vacuum of Nats contributing to this thread. Indefensible!

 

Wheeshtforindy indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JyTees said:

Rotten to the core.

 

It's no surprise there's suddenly a vacuum of Nats contributing to this thread. Indefensible!

 

Wheeshtforindy indeed.

Is that what you think is going on?

I'm enjoying watching this sideshow of increasingly amusing over excitement that will inevitably lead to a minimal effect on support for independence rather than the death blow some of you seem to imagine.

 

I'm a nationalist, I don't particularly care about salmond, or Sturgeon for that matter, and sometimes I sit back and watch dafties work themselves into a frenzy

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
20 minutes ago, theshed said:


Do you think any journalist here will ask her anything? 

 

Unfortunately that's the problem as they're all running scared of he SNP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Is that what you think is going on?

I'm enjoying watching this sideshow of increasingly amusing over excitement that will inevitably lead to a minimal effect on support for independence rather than the death blow some of you seem to imagine.

 

I'm a nationalist, I don't particularly care about salmond, or Sturgeon for that matter, and sometimes I sit back and watch dafties work themselves into a frenzy

 

What is it you think's going on Smithee? When the lord advocate orders parliament to redact evidence, specific evidence that implicates the first minister? You don't see anything that might worry you at all?

 

I get the "Indy at any cost" attitude from nationalists like yourself, but when any cost means turning a blind eye to political corruption at the very top, what is it you're really supporting?

 

If you want to fling insults about because "dafties" are a wee bit shocked and worried at the extent of criminality that's going on in government making daily decisions in their lives, fair enough. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Is that what you think is going on?

I'm enjoying watching this sideshow of increasingly amusing over excitement that will inevitably lead to a minimal effect on support for independence rather than the death blow some of you seem to imagine.

 

I'm a nationalist, I don't particularly care about salmond, or Sturgeon for that matter, and sometimes I sit back and watch dafties work themselves into a frenzy

Same as me. It's peculiar watching the  peculiar!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, theshed said:


Do you think any journalist here will ask her anything? 

Possibly. The Sky Correspondent certainly will 

Link to post
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...