Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 10

Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 10

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

Pooh

3,692 posts

268 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
I am not sure if anybody else has asked this but did she chose the date for this or was it forced on her? it seems remarkably convenient for her that the budget will overshadow this in the news.

Nath911t

627 posts

212 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
I was under the impression from her previous comments that she was relishing the opportunity to giver her version of events. All I've seen so far is deflection, replying to questions not asked, not knowing, not been notified and so on. Quite shoddy really.

Fraser and Baillie have been on the ball with answering questions and reminding NS that requests for certain documents have failed to materialise or were months late.

She is certainly not her usual fluent and unflustered self. When she was asked if Aberdein had lied about been notified of one of the complainers name her reply spoke volumes.

Is the Convener on the NS payroll? For her to shut down her duty convener seemed a bit off and unprofessional.

She'll walk away from this unscathed and it'll soon be forgotten about.

Edited by Nath911t on Wednesday 3rd March 15:58

csd19

2,343 posts

132 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Nath911t said:
I was under the impression from her previous comments that she was relishing the opportunity to giver her version of events. All I've seen so far is deflection, replying to questions not asked, not knowing, not been notified and so on. Quite shoddy really.

Fraser and Baillie have been on the ball with answering questions and reminding NS that requests for certain documents have failed to materialise or where months late.

She is certainly not her usual fluent and unflustered self. When she was asked if Aberdein had lied about been notified of one of the complainers name her reply spoke volumes.

Is the Convener on the NS payroll? For her to shut down her duty convener seemed a bit off and unprofessional.
You're damn right she is, Linda Fabiani.

TheJimi

26,418 posts

258 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Convener isn't biased at all... hehe

Shut down the deputy convener, then essentially defended NS against JB re overdue evidence submissions.

amusingduck

9,444 posts

151 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
My husband is incompetent - paraphrasing rofl

stevensdrs

3,253 posts

215 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
"there are often different accounts of a conversation" Is that the best she can come up with.

is-uk

1,517 posts

231 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Wow.... Murdo nailed her there on her views on Salmond.

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

213 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
stevensdrs said:
"there are often different accounts of a conversation" Is that the best she can come up with.
She’s struggling here

paulrockliffe

16,150 posts

242 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
is-uk said:
Wow.... Murdo nailed her there on her views on Salmond.
Every time she says, "Deeply personal" what follows is clearly a lie. Tears incoming.

csd19

2,343 posts

132 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
paulrockliffe said:
is-uk said:
Wow.... Murdo nailed her there on her views on Salmond.
Every time she says, "Deeply personal" what follows is clearly a lie. Tears incoming.
.... Bullst outgoing...

Roderick Spode

3,623 posts

64 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Murdo Fraser giving it a square go now regarding the meetings of 29th March versus 2nd April.

Sturgeon blustering as usual on the responses, obfuscating on who said what, where, when, who?

Clerks to check exact details from Mr Salmond's transcripts. I'll give her this, she plays a mean game in deflection.

There was a 3rd person in the room on 29th March, from whom the committee could 'take evidence'.

Turns out the meeting on 2nd April was considered to be a 'party personal' matter. It turned out to be government matter, but Sturgeon decided that telling anyone in government about it would have undermined the process of confidentiality (eh?). Therefore, Murrell had based his judgement of the meeting on Sturgeon's own written evidence, and assumed the reason for the meeting.

Sturgeon proceeds to tie herself up in knots.

She is basing her entire defence on the fact that those who corroborate Mr Salmond's statement regarding the meetings, were not directly involved in the meetings, and still stands by the assertion that there is zero evidence against her. Duncan Hamilton & Kevin Pringle's contemporaneous statements are apparently based on supposition and assertion, and therefore should be dismissed.

The phrases for today have been, thus far -

I will not sit here and...
I have no recollection of...
To the best of my recollection/memory...
  • Nervous laugh*
I had no involvement in...
That was not my decision...
I'm struggling to remember...
I cannot speak for...
It's been a while since I practised law, but...
I can only speak from my own experience...
  • Blink blink blink blink*

stevensdrs

3,253 posts

215 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
and Fabiana comes to her rescue with a timely recess.

amusingduck

9,444 posts

151 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Love the references to a birthday. That's probably why she forgot all about Salmond, too caught up celebrating a colleagues birthday! hehe

csd19

2,343 posts

132 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
And another helping hand from Fabiani, does she have a bus to catch at 17:03 or something?

is-uk

1,517 posts

231 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Wings is not holding back -

"We’re only two-thirds of the way through Nicola Sturgeon’s evidence to the Fabiani inquiry, and there’s probably not much point in expressing our opinion on it because you could almost certainly have guessed what it was going to be. The First Minister has been disingenuous, evasive, defensive and at times outright dishonest.

But although we were expecting all of that, this truly shocked us:

That’s the First Minister flatly stating, under oath, that even now she doesn’t know who all the complainers are. And readers can make their own minds up about how credible a claim that is. But I can tell you this:

I know who they all are.

Craig Murray knows who they all are.

Every journalist who covered the trial knows who they all are.

(And we can reasonably assume their editors also know who they all are.)

In fact pretty much everyone who’s in any way connected to Scottish politics knows the identity of every single one of these women. If you’re willing to believe that we all do but Nicola Sturgeon doesn’t, well, fair enough. But also, I’m a Nigerian prince and I’d like to pass several million pounds through your bank account.*



https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-biggest-lie-ever...

TheJimi

26,418 posts

258 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Cole Hamilton is seriously sceptical, to say the least.

Interesting body language he used when describing the clashing accounts - using his fists to demonstrate. I reckon there's some big doubts within the committee.


amusingduck

9,444 posts

151 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
I'm getting so sick of hearing I can't remember!

amusingduck

9,444 posts

151 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

JB has well and truly tripped her up there

is-uk

1,517 posts

231 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Wow....now it's let's rewrite the Misterial Code. No doubt we should apply the rewrite retrospectively so she can say she hasn't broken it.

Roderick Spode

3,623 posts

64 months

Wednesday 3rd March 2021
quotequote all
Jackie Baillie. Were you aware of prior meetings before 29th March?

NS - There are legal precedents that prevent me answering that.

JB - There are no legal precedents that prevent you answering if you were aware of these meetings.

NS - I was not aware, not to the best of my knowledge, no.

Burn. NS is slipping into the snappy, angry voice territory. She's getting riled about this line of questioning.

NS - I have not seen Geoff Aberdein's account.

JB - It was given under oath in court.

NS - I was not in the court.

JB - It was widely reported in the media...

NS - I saw media reports that were purported to be his submission, it may not have been his submission, therefore I have not seen it directly.

More waffle before the Convenor shut it down. An amazing exchange.

JB - 2nd April meeting, why would you have said in advance that you were meeting with Mr Salmond to clear his name, if you didn't know what he was needing to clear his name of?

NS - That's an amazing leap of logic there.

JB - were you there as First Minister or party leader?

NS - I was at that time Alec's friend, and wanted to meet on a party/personal basis. Had I intervened I would have done so as First Minister.

JB - why did you not report it to the Civil Service?

NS - My decisions were not based on the classification of the meeting. I think if I had reported it, I would have risked the impartiality of the process.

JB - There are no exemptions to the Ministerial Code.

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED