Salmond v Sturgeon Round 3 — Comment along with Sturgeon

[PolkadotsAndMoonbeams]

Previous thread here.

@LexMitior

I've been watching this and was on the last threads.

What I notice is the investment, huge emotional investment that NS has from others heree. I think this is actually difficult for people to deal with, that she has made some very poor decisions, that these are unlawful, and the rammifications of that are very serious. As a person we can have sympathy but as a leader she gets all the brickbats and some more. That is politics for you.

There are two possibilities here, neither of which are enlightening

a) Nicola Sturgeon does not run her government competently
b) Nicola Sturgeon positively decided to introduce an unlawful policy, incompetently, defend it to the point of absurdity where it could not be represented in court without lawyers lying, and did not think of the wider context in which here actions would be considered.

Neither is good. a) says she's not up to it, b) is more sinister.

This is the view I reached after reading Craig Murray's affidavit in late January. ie. she's clearly competent, so B. And because she is competent and has done some good things, that is a shame. Everything that's come out since has backed up Murray's report. Today's session just compounds it all. For anyone coming late to this and feeling overwhelmed by the detail and dissembling - it's worth returning to Murray's report. Click here: www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/my-sworn-evidence-on-the-sturgeon-affair/

Minty you can't start actioning something against someone just on heresay. where would we be if you could.

Issued an internal communication asking anyone who had a complaint

there was an internal communication along those lines later - for which they've been very much under fire! - suggesting they were sinisterly trying to gather incriminating evidence against Salmond.
So you've nothing to say about Salmond's behaviour - it's just all Nicola Sturgeon's fault

[quote AlmightyBob]@kurtrussellsbeard same here. I'm not an SNP voter, or particularly a fan of any of the political parties in Scotland. I have to decide every election who I'm going to vote for based on whose bullshit is least egregious . But I think Sturgeon's doing alright today and I find the hot takes on this thread a bit odd, to the extent that I wonder if we're watching the same hearing.[/quote]
I find this super interesting.

She has refused to investigate the leak of an accuser. It is a matter for the police in any other environment. It is illegal. To not investigate is gross misconduct.

How can she say she stands up for the victims but then allows the person to maintain in the government. Why should anyone come forward now? will their name also be leaked? A disgrace to the victims.

The fish rots from the head.

She must be thinking 'Grrr bloody Peter. This was all your bright idea to get rid of him fer gud.'

I feel quite sure that Nicola Sturgeon is lying but strangely I also feel quite sympathetic to her lies - very similar to lies and situations I have been caught up in before. She’s in a difficult position.

Never any repercussions.

@kurtrussellsbeard

Imagine if they hadn't pursued a case against AS if they had even a midgie's baw hair's chance of winning.

It would have been the cover up of the century.

But the options weren't "pursue a case against salmond" or "do nothing".

There were other actions that could have been taken.

My feed has stopped working ah!

BBC Scotland just showed an old bit of footage of Prince Philip laughing and then went off air!!

[quote AlmightyBob]@kurtrussellsbeard same here. I'm not an SNP voter, or particularly a fan of any of the political parties in Scotland. I have to decide every election who I'm going to vote for based on whose bullshit is least egregious . But I think Sturgeon's doing alright today and I find the hot takes on this thread a bit odd, to the extent that I wonder if we're watching the same hearing.[/quote]
We must be watching different things then. She has been waffling and trying to deflect questions and stuttering.

I loved the bit where Jackie Baillie thanked her for her guidance on the question she has asked (paraphrasing) but asked her to actually answer the question.

tooty - Oh no!!
They are perhaps practising

@WaxOnFeckOff I genuinely didn't realise that? What else could they have done?

To be fair to the Fm, if I'd been questioned for 7 hours I'd be waffling too. I'd defy any one to do better.

@Amortentia

To be fair to the Fm, if I'd been questioned for 7 hours I'd be waffling too. I'd defy any one to do better.

Well Salmond did.

Was Jackie Baillie a lawyer before becoming a politician?

Tbh the waffle started at 9.30.

I feel no clearer

@Graffitiqueen JB was completely wrong there. NS actually laughed a bit because that was so ridiculous. She did answer the question she just pointed out that JB was focussing on the wrong date. Why focus on Halloween when there was an important development in December.

Nothing is clearer.

[quote kurtrussellsbeard]@Graffitiqueen JB was completely wrong there. NS actually laughed a bit because that was so ridiculous. She did answer the question she just pointed out that JB was focussing on the wrong date. Why focus on Halloween when there was an important development in December. [/quote]
Disagree. JB was spot on.

That was for Graffiti!

@Graffitiqueen she was a resource centre manager.

I'm sure Humza will pick it as a highlight

you've really got a thing about him haven't you? I hope you're not going to descend into another racist rant about him

Yes if being spot on means that you focus on something that happened in October when there was an important development that happened in December that largely made October's email irrelevant.

So - it wasn't the first time she'd heard the rumours.
And yet when she heard these last ones she felt 'physically sick'

She thinks we're all mugs. Just because many of her supporters are