- Joined
- Jun 27, 2002
- Messages
- 19,674
- Reaction score
- 10,255
- Points
- 128
To be fair he maybe only talked for about half that time - some of the committee were spending ages to ask a question!Wtf did he talk about for 6 or 7 hours?
To be fair he maybe only talked for about half that time - some of the committee were spending ages to ask a question!Wtf did he talk about for 6 or 7 hours?
Does anyone think there's room for two or more bona fide independence parties?
The SNP has always been a bit of an odd political cabal in my opinion with a broad spectrum of political views. Its been referred to as the Tartan Tories in the distant past then a huge influx of new members a few years ago saw that well and truly gubbed.
Holding together such a diverse range of views has been some achievement in itself and I'm surprised the unity has been so strong - up till now.
Trust that wee fat egotistical jambo to blow that out the water. He was not guilty of all the charges laid against him but his character type was never going to do the cause any good once the inevitable revelations broke.
If Scottish people are further left than English what would be the benefit of independence to a right of centre party?Yes, would be good to have more credible independence supporting parties. I actually think it would be good to have a right of centre independence supporting Party. Seems weird that they all vote to have as little power in their own country as possible.
A "new Labour" Independence Party?If Scottish people are further left than English what would be the benefit of independence to a right of centre party?
If Scottish people are further left than English what would be the benefit of independence to a right of centre party?
How would independence benefit such a party over the status quo though?A "new Labour" Independence Party?
occupying centre right?
I'm not a fan of national exceptionalism but it appears to me it's much easier to bury scandal and milk cash out of the English than it is the Scots. We seem to be having a forensic enquiry into "he said she said" whilst they're chucking billions at their pals with gay abandon down south with nary a raised eyebrow. So I'd suggest if they want to clamber aboard the gravy train the UK is a better option than an independent Scotland.My thinking was that some might realise they could make more money and have more power.
Status quo are Tories.How would independence benefit such a party over the status quo though?
I actually thought that's where the SNP were and was thinking the gap in the electoral market was to the left!Yes, would be good to have more credible independence supporting parties. I actually think it would be good to have a right of centre independence supporting Party. Seems weird that they all vote to have as little power in their own country as possible.
What I can't understand about this arguement is that, by the time the allegations came out, he was already yesterday's man.There was no need for anyone to fit him up.His claim essentially is that the first minister - along with the head of the crown office and a large chunk of the senior civil service - was party to a criminal conspiracy to fit up and imprison a political opponent on rape charges.
Sarah Smith. She should get sanctioned for that - shocking.View attachment 4534
Locusts.
Good Law Project are going after them, with some success tooI'm not a fan of national exceptionalism but it appears to me it's much easier to bury scandal and milk cash out of the English than it is the Scots. We seem to be having a forensic enquiry into "he said she said" whilst they're chucking billions at their pals with gay abandon down south with nary a raised eyebrow. So I'd suggest if they want to clamber aboard the gravy train the UK is a better option than an independent Scotland.
She's no scared off talking shite.Sarah Smith. She should get sanctioned for that - shocking.
Yeah but even after last week's court case win Hancock managed to just go on telly and make out it was all a storm in a teacup and just about publishing contracts a couple of weeks late.Good Law Project are going after them, with some success too
Homepage - Good Law Project
We use the law for a better world. We know that the law, in the right hands, can be a fair and decent force for good. It is a practical tool for positive change and can make amazing things happen.goodlawproject.org
Don't see any media interest in that thoughGood Law Project are going after them, with some success too
Homepage - Good Law Project
We use the law for a better world. We know that the law, in the right hands, can be a fair and decent force for good. It is a practical tool for positive change and can make amazing things happen.goodlawproject.org
It started with a reasonable attempt to publicly shame him for things he'd actually done in order to shut his mates within the SNP up.What I can't understand about this arguement is that, by the time the allegations came out, he was already yesterday's man.There was no need for anyone to fit him up.
The fault, imo, lies with the Procurator Fiscal's office for bringing a weak case against him but, given the spirit of the times and similar high profile cases, they probably felt damned if they did and damned if they didn't.
Alex has already been given a wadge of cash. He should put a pound of flesh out of his head.
I dont think untenable stands much ground in politics, you just have to look at Hancock, Johnson, Jenirik, Patel and half the Tories and there breaking of ministerial code and law, all still in a job.It started with a reasonable attempt to publicly shame him for things he'd actually done in order to shut his mates within the SNP up.
They botched that, and then kept raising the stakes rather than admitting to even small procedural errors to the point of forcing through a facetious criminal case to draw attention away from the failing and perjurious judicial review.
Its the total disregard for the law in order to save face (again, assuming Salmond's claims stack up which i believe they do) that's scary here. Sturgeon may not have been the motivating force but if she was as informed as she seems to have been and kept waving it through, her position is absolutely untenable imo
If what you're saying is right, then it's totally appalling. I have to accept that you'll know more about the infighting than I wouldIt started with a reasonable attempt to publicly shame him for things he'd actually done in order to shut his mates within the SNP up.
They botched that, and then kept raising the stakes rather than admitting to even small procedural errors to the point of forcing through a facetious criminal case to draw attention away from the failing and perjurious judicial review.
Its the total disregard for the law in order to save face (again, assuming Salmond's claims stack up which i believe they do) that's scary here. Sturgeon may not have been the motivating force but if she was as informed as she seems to have been and kept waving it through, her position is absolutely untenable imo
I agree.£500,000 plus costs, down the drain for nothing as the lawyers for Scotgov had "reservations" about its court battle with Alex Salmond more than two months before it conceded the case.
Salmond had said the government was told in October 2018 that it was likely to lose the case.
The government only conceded the following January that its investigation into complaints against Mr Salmond had been unlawful.
Deputy First Minister John Swinney has now admitted that concerns were raised.
But he insisted there were "good public policy arguments and reasonable grounds" to continue contesting the case.
The government ultimately had to pay Mr Salmond's legal fees of more than £500,000 on top of its own costs after its admitting its investigation had been unlawful.
This following collective Scotgovs bottle crashing yesterday to save the hopeless Swinneys ass.
The Deputy First Minister, agreed to release Scotgovs legal advice on Alex Salmond’s court action after facing cross-party censure in Holyrood initiated by the Tories, supported by the Greens, who usually pull them out the shit, Labour and Liberals.
BIG G
On the other hand Starmer and General Secretary David Evans,£500,000 plus costs, down the drain for nothing as the lawyers for Scotgov had "reservations" about its court battle with Alex Salmond more than two months before it conceded the case.
Salmond had said the government was told in October 2018 that it was likely to lose the case.
The government only conceded the following January that its investigation into complaints against Mr Salmond had been unlawful.
Deputy First Minister John Swinney has now admitted that concerns were raised.
But he insisted there were "good public policy arguments and reasonable grounds" to continue contesting the case.
The government ultimately had to pay Mr Salmond's legal fees of more than £500,000 on top of its own costs after its admitting its investigation had been unlawful.
This following collective Scotgovs bottle crashing yesterday to save the hopeless Swinneys ass.
The Deputy First Minister, agreed to release Scotgovs legal advice on Alex Salmond’s court action after facing cross-party censure in Holyrood initiated by the Tories, supported by the Greens, who usually pull them out the shit, Labour and Liberals.
BIG G
The gunts paid over £600,000 in legal costs for their ridiculous/hopeless/always destined to fail bid to stay up last season. And their ripped off fans who paid that money in rolled over and had their tummies tickled, again.On the other hand Starmer and General Secretary David Evans,
Labour agrees to pay ‘substantial damages’ to Panorama whistleblowers.
Labour agreed to paid over £600,000 to seven whistleblowers over “defamatory and false allegations’’ made following a BBC Panorama investigation into antisemitism.
The Party also issued an unreserved apology to the former staff members and to John Ware, the journalist who presented the July 2019 programme.
Ironically Starmer and Evans for their own narrow politically motivated reasons, as a way of marginalizing the party’s left wing, totally ignored the advice of Labour's legal team not to settle as Labour would win.
The only difference was that the wasted £500k was tax payers money and the wasted £600k was Labour Party members money.
No matter still an awful lot of money to blow.
BIG G
Must be a election soon, Dross has gone full coup mode, Unionist propaganda to derail the inevitable independence, divide and conquer. The Tories covid response kills thousands , boris illegally prorogues parliament , the tories threaten to break international law , hancock breaks the law and ministerial code , patel breaks ministerial code ...but nicola mis remembers a date
It's MUCH MUCH more than mis remembering a date.
9:00am tomorrow Nicola is up in front of the committee...worth a watch, as I think she's now toast. She might survive this, but even if she does, it is the beginning of the end for her I think.
Not sure how she can survive this now, and not just her, Swinney can gtf as well, along with a few others.It's MUCH MUCH more than mis remembering a date.
9:00am tomorrow Nicola is up in front of the committee...worth a watch, as I think she's now toast. She might survive this, but even if she does, it is the beginning of the end for her I think.
I am not a big fan of hers either, some thick fux think that makes you a Boris fan or a Tory, my experience of COVID is what taints my view of her , I think she has politicised the pandemic and come across as anti-English throughout, major faux paus in my view are:I’m not a big fan of Nicola. She snubbed me once at a business meeting but honestly it’s not because of that.
Actually it is.
Apart from that error, I reckon she’s done pretty well. Certainly as regards COVID compared to Boris.
But I think she’s jumped the shark.
Not a euphemism for Salmond.
Hope not as Unionists are all over social media saying keep focused the task in hand is to get rid of Sturgeon, I hope she turns up tommorow and fights back.It's MUCH MUCH more than mis remembering a date.
9:00am tomorrow Nicola is up in front of the committee...worth a watch, as I think she's now toast. She might survive this, but even if she does, it is the beginning of the end for her I think.
I still can't really fathom what exactly she's supposed to have done. Whatever it is though I don't want to hear any justifications based on the fact that the UK government is even worse. I don't want to see standards in Scotland dropping just because the UK is descending into a banana republic.It's MUCH MUCH more than mis remembering a date.
9:00am tomorrow Nicola is up in front of the committee...worth a watch, as I think she's now toast. She might survive this, but even if she does, it is the beginning of the end for her I think.
I can only assume that either:Does anyone know anything about the spiked story claim?
Sturgeon's opening statement this morning was excellent, just the right amount of humility, anger and a couple of well placed shots at Salmond's integrity
This thread has been viewed 17553 times.