Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 10

[Ridgemont]

So it all went wrong after the 11th December.

Oh aye.

[Dr Jekyll]

Ridgemont said:

So it all went wrong after the 11th December.

Oh aye.

Of course. How could the Scottish government ever have expected that documents from the Scottish government would suddenly and unexpectedly come to light?

[Roderick Spode]

WackyWeaver said:

Roderick Spode said:

Interesting. Just for clarification, I must have missed the part where he was convicted on any of the allegations. Do you have a link to those convictions?

If you are making reference to Mr Dunlop's comments outside court, the supposed behaviour did not constitute a criminal act, otherwise he would have been tried as such on that behaviour.

Ms Sturgeon has said on repeated occasions, and again in the session this morning, that Mr Salmond is in essence guilty of unspecified sexual crimes, with no official right of reply from Mr Salmond. Last week she said he was effectively guilty, but for lack of evidence, despite being found not guilty in a criminal trial by a jury of his peers. I'm not saying the man is a saint, but whatever behaviour he was alleged to have undertaken did not breach the threshold of criminality, which was determined by a prolonged police investigation, and by a criminal trial. If Ms Sturgeon continues to make such allegations, he has every right to take action via his lawyers.

Gordon Jackson QC actually. Simply thought it was humours you were hypothetically posing what his lawyers thoughts were of Nicola painting such a picture when they probably have the same thoughts.

Sturgeon has not said he was guilty at all. As you have indicated if that has been the case then I’m sure Alex would have brought some sort of action forward.

You're quite right, apologies, Mr Jackson. To paraphrase our egregious First Minister, ah wisnae there, it wisnae me, someone else made the decision.

His lawyers may well have similar thoughts relating to his alleged behaviour, but such an opinion does not blur the lines when it comes to the limits of criminality. Ms Sturgeon said in her daily PPB last Friday that Mr Salmond may have been found not guilty, but that does not mean that the behaviour did not happen, implying that the events disproven in court did somehow take place. The return of the not guilty verdicts, in the eyes of the law, means that the events did not happen. She did not directly say he was guilty, but she has implied that the trial verdict was not somehow insecure on the grounds that the alleged behaviour did happen. His lawyers may have an interest in such assertions made in a televised broadcast.

[Ridgemont]

Dr Jekyll said:

Ridgemont said:

So it all went wrong after the 11th December.

Oh aye.

Of course. How could the Scottish government ever have expected that documents from the Scottish government would suddenly and unexpectedly come to light?

[paulrockliffe]

steely dan said:

My overall conclusion is that she is and has not been in administrative control of her government .

Only if you believe what she says.

Either she should resign because her Government has been running amok behind her back or she should resign because she's guilty as sin.

Tricky.

[Ridgemont]

paulrockliffe said:

steely dan said:

My overall conclusion is that she is and has not been in administrative control of her government .

Only if you believe what she says.

Either she should resign because her Government has been running amok behind her back or she should resign because she's guilty as sin.

Tricky.

Remember Nicky is in complete control unless of course where there is illegality/incompetence/negligence/fkwittery of the highest order. In which case she knew nowt.

[amusingduck]

Unless there are some serious bombs still to come, I'm struggling to see how she's not going to slither her way out of this

[Roderick Spode]

Roderick Spode said:

Sturgeon stating that she doesn't know the identities of all the alphabet sisters. She also states that the alphabet sisters don't all know each other.

How does she know that, if she doesn't know their identities?

Who's on Twitter as Bravefart?

Just read this post on an AgentP22 thread.

https://twitter.com/bravefart9/status/136709275823...

[steely dan]

My advice to the Greens would be ," when you sup with the devil you better have a long spoon ..."

[Roderick Spode]

amusingduck said:

Unless there are some serious bombs still to come, I'm struggling to see how she's not going to slither her way out of this

Unfortunately that's what I'm taking from it too. Easy softball lobs from the SNP drones, other MSPs stifled and controlled by the Convenor, lots of deflection and spin from the Chief Mammy to avoid any form of accusation against her, nobody has landed a meaningful blow yet. She's going to walk away from this, and her acolytes will crow endlessly about the Great Dear Leader evading the yoon conspiracy.

[NoddyonNitrous]

Roderick Spode said:

Unfortunately that's what I'm taking from it too. Easy softball lobs from the SNP drones, other MSPs stifled and controlled by the Convenor, lots of deflection and spin from the Chief Mammy to avoid any form of accusation against her, nobody has landed a meaningful blow yet. She's going to walk away from this, and her acolytes will crow endlessly about the Great Dear Leader evading the yoon conspiracy.

But surely it's not what happens today that is the final verdict, it's what is said in and the conclusions of, the Committee report?
And then there's Hamilton's verdict on Friday.

[Ridgemont]

NoddyonNitrous said:

Roderick Spode said:

Unfortunately that's what I'm taking from it too. Easy softball lobs from the SNP drones, other MSPs stifled and controlled by the Convenor, lots of deflection and spin from the Chief Mammy to avoid any form of accusation against her, nobody has landed a meaningful blow yet. She's going to walk away from this, and her acolytes will crow endlessly about the Great Dear Leader evading the yoon conspiracy.

But surely it's not what happens today that is the final verdict, it's what is said in and the conclusions of, the Committee report?
And then there's Hamilton's verdict on Friday.

It’s also an opportunity for her to future perjure herself. She’s made herself a bit of a hostage to fortune re the WhatsApp messages.

[Rick_1138]

It's probably just lockdown and young baby sleeplessness downer talking, but you just know, this will come to nothing,

Chief mammy will guide us to overall majority, then Indy 2 and it'll all be ste going forward.

[Roderick Spode]

NoddyonNitrous said:

Roderick Spode said:

Unfortunately that's what I'm taking from it too. Easy softball lobs from the SNP drones, other MSPs stifled and controlled by the Convenor, lots of deflection and spin from the Chief Mammy to avoid any form of accusation against her, nobody has landed a meaningful blow yet. She's going to walk away from this, and her acolytes will crow endlessly about the Great Dear Leader evading the yoon conspiracy.

But surely it's not what happens today that is the final verdict, it's what is said in and the conclusions of, the Committee report?
And then there's Hamilton's verdict on Friday.

Well quite. But given the hype that a killer blow would be landed today, and she would have to tender her resignation forthwith, it's turned out to be something of a damp squib - given the depth and breadth of evidence available that contradicts her version of events, one must query why the inquiry has thus far been unable to land a meaningful punch on her. Is it deliberate obfuscation by the Convenor and SNP members? As with Salmond, they spent the first two hours dancing round their handbags regarding procedures, with zero input from other members. The difference between Salmond and Sturgeon is that Sturgeon was quite happy to discuss irrelevant time wasting at length and in great profusion. The Sturgeon acolytes will be frasmodic with pleasure if she emerges with anything other than an absolute calamity.

[Pastor Of Muppets]

The lying liar lies live..... This is an abomination......

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

[hidetheelephants]

dxg said:

What annoys me about the fact that the commentators keep talking about the pointless case has cost the taxpayer £500k - it hasn't, Those were only Salmond's costs. What were the SG's costs? What's the total cost - it must be over a million...

Good point, well made; didn't they refuse to tell us how much it cost?

[A.J.M]

I can see her getting off on this.

Half the question have zero bite to them.
She can waffle and head spin her way round all this now as most won’t try and get to the truth.

[NoddyonNitrous]

But she's not doing a convincing job of refuting Salmond's testimony.

[csd19]

NoddyonNitrous said:

But she's not doing a convincing job of refuting Salmond's testimony.

Nope!

Do we reckon the VONC in Swinney will continue to stand?

[Dinoboy]

She's not as convincing this afternoon as she was this morning.