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

1 minute ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I couldn’t agree less with your interpretation of what she has done but we are both biased so that’s not surprising.

 

What you have done and what has been evident all over social media by other nationalists is lump her in with Patel, Johnson etc.  That’s disastrous for her. 

I’m by no means lumping her in with those 3 crooks. The comparison i am making is of the distorted media coverage. The British media would have you believe that she has committed a cardinal sin of which she much resign over. This isn’t actually the case. 
 

It appears as though the tories, unionist and their friends in the media are desperate to get rid of her out of fear. The initial media commentators were saying this committee would spell the end for her. They’ve changed their tune a bit today. Now it’s the independent investigation that will end her and that this committee isn’t a big deal and more about procedures. It’s desperation on the part of unionists. It’s quite sad really. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jack D and coke
17 minutes ago, jamboy1982 said:

Please list the lies and the evidence to support your claims. 

I’d imagine his answer will be another question. Press him further and you’ll get some Scottish cringe type reply aboot shortbread/tartan/tinpot or something. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BBC Scotland been got at! Picture of the inquiry down to some old film of The Duke of Edinburgh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brighton Jambo
5 minutes ago, jamboy1982 said:

I’m by no means lumping her in with those 3 crooks. The comparison i am making is of the distorted media coverage. The British media would have you believe that she has committed a cardinal sin of which she much resign over. This isn’t actually the case. 
 

It appears as though the tories, unionist and their friends in the media are desperate to get rid of her out of fear. The initial media commentators were saying this committee would spell the end for her. They’ve changed their tune a bit today. Now it’s the independent investigation that will end her and that this committee isn’t a big deal and more about procedures. It’s desperation on the part of unionists. It’s quite sad really. 

Alex Salmond said under oath last week that she broke the ministerial code which is automatically a resigning matter.  Not a Tory or a Unionist but her former mentor in front of a Holyrood committee on National television.  That’s as big as it gets and it’s bizarre you think the press coverage wouldn’t reflect that.

 

All this talk or Tories and Patel is just deflection.  This is Alex Salmond causing this damage.  

Edited by Brighton Jambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brighton Jambo
6 minutes ago, jamboy1982 said:

I’m by no means lumping her in with those 3 crooks. The comparison i am making is of the distorted media coverage. The British media would have you believe that she has committed a cardinal sin of which she much resign over. This isn’t actually the case. 
 

It appears as though the tories, unionist and their friends in the media are desperate to get rid of her out of fear. The initial media commentators were saying this committee would spell the end for her. They’ve changed their tune a bit today. Now it’s the independent investigation that will end her and that this committee isn’t a big deal and more about procedures. It’s desperation on the part of unionists. It’s quite sad really. 

Even is she doesn’t resign this has done untold damage to her reputation and, as recent polls have shown, support for independence.  This also won’t go away, as Alex Salmond has demonstrated today he won’t stop until he has brought her and others down.   Wonderful stuff, he’s a proper Hearts man.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hagar the Horrible

So in meeting in which she forgot about that left her shaken has no recollection of the details but knows as a fact that Alex worked out the names of the complainers using social media, even though she denies the existence of a meeting beforehand that she was told the specifics, which she denies having but knows for a fact she was not told by Geoff at that meeting with perfect recollection she was not told those names, but 2 other witnesses have come forward today to say she was told the details and she has recalled to agree to meet him only on the basis Alex was going to resign from the party?  Yet other witnesses say she was told the specifics beforehand, and she had not discussed this with her husband either?  Her recollection of either meeting is vague the details are as grey as a grey thing. Yet she is adamant she did nothing wrong.

An unreliable witness as you can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

BBC Scotland been got at! Picture of the inquiry down to some old film of The Duke of Edinburgh.

 

Wonder if he's deid and they've gone too early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not recording meetings to protect confidentiality is not credible. 

 

There are clear procedures to protect secrecy. And there are plenty of other areas kept confidential. But records are still kept. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

So in meeting in which she forgot about that left her shaken has no recollection of the details but knows as a fact that Alex worked out the names of the complainers using social media, even though she denies the existence of a meeting beforehand that she was told the specifics, which she denies having but knows for a fact she was not told by Geoff at that meeting with perfect recollection she was not told those names, but 2 other witnesses have come forward today to say she was told the details and she has recalled to agree to meet him only on the basis Alex was going to resign from the party?  Yet other witnesses say she was told the specifics beforehand, and she had not discussed this with her husband either?  Her recollection of either meeting is vague the details are as grey as a grey thing. Yet she is adamant she did nothing wrong.

 

An unreliable witness as you can get.

 


 

 

Tying he self in knots. As far as I know😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First time I’ve watched this but under questioning from Murdo Fraser about specifics she can’t seem to remember an awful lot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Not recording meetings to protect confidentiality is not credible. 

 

There are clear procedures to protect secrecy. And there are plenty of other areas kept confidential. But records are still kept. 

 

Would be a resigning offence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Boy Daniel said:

Would be a resigning offence?

 

That is more serious.

 

Not recording Government business. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if Nicola didn't record or notify meeting undermines confidentiality what does that say about the Government? 

 

Sworn as they are to protect confidentiality. There are loads of sensitive information in Government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

That is more serious.

 

Not recording Government business. 

Thanks one other question has she broken the ministerial code by not recording the meeting? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I watch this, the more I think......why can't we just get Geoff Aberdein to testify in front of the committee and save ourselves hours of this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Boy Daniel said:

Thanks one other question has she broken the ministerial code by not recording the meeting? 

 

Potentially. A few things today do need further clarification. 

 

I'm never looking for anyone to be sanctioned. Overall is anything that serious. I can see why she did what she says she did. The key issue is still the wider conspiracy allegation. Which got a boost today by explanations justifying bypassing the women's wishes.

 

But not recording meetings is a big deal by their own rules. Nicola sees national security and organised crime papers for example. How then is a sexual harassment matter incapable of being recorded. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, jonnothejambo said:

 

His condition has slightly improved.

 

Usually happens before the croak doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Honest politicians and an honest even handed press, that would be first. 

Next you'll be demanding an honest SPFL board.

 

:lol: Fairy tale time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

manaliveits105

Swinney will have to burst into the room and throw in the white towel soon 

not a convincing display .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Potentially. A few things today do need further clarification. 

 

I'm never looking for anyone to be sanctioned. Overall is anything that serious. I can see why she did what she says she did. The key issue is still the wider conspiracy allegation. Which got a boost today by explanations justifying bypassing the women's wishes.

 

But not recording meetings is a big deal by their own rules. Nicola sees national security and organised crime papers for example. How then is a sexual harassment matter incapable of being recorded. 


Thanks Mikey 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

Swinney will have to burst into the room and throw in the white towel soon 

not a convincing display .

There’s been withholding of documents by Swinney that have been requested and the time of the ones they have hand over was picked up on too. To my suspicious mind this was done deliberately to make the questions the committee could ask much more difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanks said no

Only caught the first hour on the radio and just got back to see Murdo Fraser questioning her around 1610. Thought she was about to crack and breakdown, only for the Convenor to call a recess at 1615.

 

From what I have picked up there hasn't really been anything new or conclusive, is this right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Frenchman Returns said:

Only caught the first hour on the radio and just got back to see Murdo Fraser questioning her around 1610. Thought she was about to crack and breakdown, only for the Convenor to call a recess at 1615.

 

From what I have picked up there hasn't really been anything new or conclusive, is this right?

 

I've not read or heard anything significant to make me think that a lot of this is opposition MPs hoping to catch Sturgeon out on something. 

Other than making some stern points here and there i don't think they have really achieved anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mysterion said:

 

I've not read or heard anything significant to make me think that a lot of this is opposition MPs hoping to catch Sturgeon out on something. 

Other than making some stern points here and there i don't think they have really achieved anything. 

This is my reading of things. They have not managed to get anything on sturgeon. One word against another persons word but noting concrete. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, The Frenchman Returns said:

Only caught the first hour on the radio and just got back to see Murdo Fraser questioning her around 1610. Thought she was about to crack and breakdown, only for the Convenor to call a recess at 1615.

 

From what I have picked up there hasn't really been anything new or conclusive, is this right?

I am not surprised she nearly cracked, his question was out of line, she should not apologise for Salmonds actions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still a problem with failing to report or record. 

 

Could be a problem. 

Edited by Mikey1874
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the same supposition, hearsay, chinese whispers, conspiracy theories and other nonsense that's been around this case since the start.

 

A bungled, rushed investigation into Salmond for sure. Answers must be found as to how it was conducted so poorly.

No grand plan at the heart of it though.

 

They're grasping at straws.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cade said:

All the same supposition, hearsay, chinese whispers, conspiracy theories and other nonsense that's been around this case since the start.

 

A bungled, rushed investigation into Salmond for sure. Answers must be found as to how it was conducted so poorly.

No grand plan at the heart of it though.

 

They're grasping at straws.

 

 

Most of what you say is correct. Sturgeon may not have been party  to a witch hunt but her subordinates may well have been out to get Salmond for his known behaviour 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BarneyBattles said:

is the deputy convenor pished?😄

No but she is on a roll. The SNP conveyor is no best pleased. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BarneyBattles said:

is the deputy convenor pished?😄

😂 couple of shandies at lunch, or her teeth are playing up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

Landing heavy blows on the midden.

What heavy blows were these? I heard a lot of incoherent rantings and not one single question

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanks said no
10 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Linda Fabiani SNP

 

Deleted my inappropriate comment, that was disappointing and they will have fun agreeing the report they publish!

Edited by The Frenchman Returns
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BarneyBattles said:

 

The deputy has just been rambling and made a tit of herself and was quite rightly pulled up for it. Shambles.

It’s obvious she doesn’t like Sturgeon and she had venom in her words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jackie Weavers community council would be laughing at this shambles, I think Nicola will go home feeling like we do after most derbies, why on earth was I worried about that??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BarneyBattles said:

 

They don't exist of course.

 

Nicola finishing strongly now.

 

She's finished, true.

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...