Salmond v Sturgeon round 4. What next?

[Cismyfatarse]

New thread.

Oh god those Twitter links re Sparling are a bit of a rabbit hole. Alyn Smith took over LGBT youth from John Hein of PIE.

Was Sparling Angus Robertson’s campaign manager? The drag act guy?

@Graffitiqueen as in Paedophile Information Exchange?? Bloody hell!

[quote Blurberoo]@Graffitiqueen as in Paedophile Information Exchange?? Bloody hell![/quote]
Yes.

Alyn "daddy bear" Smyth. 🤮🤮

Jesus no wonder they are so keen to shut women up. Gaslighting on a massive scale!

I loved the beaten SNP candidate describing the Tories as the Mafia and actually thinking that even if they were, it would still be better than the SNP. I mean, the mafia have a clear business model, make money and at least know where their bodies are buried.

The SNP seem to be working on the mafias other qualities of ensuring there is no dissent and there is no paper trail...

I am starting to see SNP more like North Korea in the making. You don't speak out against the party and your regime is unable to feed the citizens.

@Graffitiqueen

Oh god those Twitter links re Sparling are a bit of a rabbit hole. Alyn Smith took over LGBT youth from John Hein of PIE.

Yup, nothing to see here, nothing at all

If what I saw briefly on Twitter - now deleted - about Sparling is true there should be some very serious questions being asked about the culture of a particular faction of the party. He’s no longer an SNP staffer, right enough, but then Salmond wasn’t an SNP minister and they went after him ...

It’s a pretty unusual name, but I suppose there’s a remote possibility it’s a different person.

Latest revelations on Salmond case itself.
The Procurator Fiscal had to threaten Police enforcement to get the SG to comply with the terms of the search warrant in Nov 2019.
www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/prosecutors-issued-raid-threat-scottish-23711561

Wow. And they still didn't actually comply fully.

Whatnwould happen to a normal person obstructing a search warrant?

And just in case anyone is still not shocked. Turns out the Party had complaints about Grady reported to Bercow prior to the events under investigation now.

Also a bit more farce on how the Salmond Committee is still being obstructed.

www.sundaypost.com/fp/sturgeon-patrick-grady/

And something else discussed at the not government business meeting at her house...

I'm not sure what horrifies me most about this, the duplicity of the SG or the apparent or the seeming acquiesce of the public. I despair.

It's frustrating seeing this come to a conclusion with an incurious committee not looking to get answers. If it's true they've decided not to seek documents from Salmond's lawyers, that's wholly unsatisfactory. And just increases the suspicion over what's still being covered up.

Any government able to manipulate a process that was intended to scrutinise their mistakes is fundamentally flawed. Nothing I've seen or read convinces me that there could be any satisfactory explanation for that lack of curiosity from the committee to get answers to questions that they should be asking.

Anyone get the feeling that both investigations will report that whilst there are some irregularities, on balance no code broken and nothing to see here?

I truly hope I'm wrong.

@WaxOnFeckOff

Anyone get the feeling that both investigations will report that whilst there are some irregularities, on balance no code broken and nothing to see here?

I truly hope I'm wrong.

I agree, sadly.

The faithful don’t care anyway 🤷🏻‍♀️

Yes there are 2 Scotlands it seems. The one that most of us live in and the one that is covered in glitter and roses that some posters seem to try to convince us exists

They’ll be the “everything the SNP does is wonderful and even if it’s not it’s better than the Tories” crew

news.sky.com/story/snp-accused-of-shocking-failure-in-handling-of-online-harassment-and-abuse-claims-12245908

Just pulled this from the article above:

Sources within SNP headquarters have responded by saying the party was aware of concerns being raised about the online views of a particular individual.

"They say that he, himself, claimed he had been the target of online abuse and that fellow party members had expressed transphobic views."

"The SNP sources say that, while it was clear members had different views, it did not see any concrete evidence of transphobia."

So, the question remains that they investigated the counter claims of transphobia but did jack shit about the original complaints of abusive behaviour?

So we already have people willing to hide behind protected characteristics while abuse to women goes un-investigated?

I'm not intolerant of those who want to live their lives peacefully and without abuse but again that means as long as they aren't women it seems.

So, the question remains that they investigated the counter claims of transphobia but did jack shit about the original complaints of abusive behaviour?

This is what I can't get over with the SNP. They've acted like there's no problem (knowing there was) to the detriment of not only female members & officials, but allowed to fester & and escalate, seemingly to make life unbearable for Cherry.

I think whoever else was involved in this thought they could push some people's buttons to benefit their own agenda but didn't factor for how far things would or could go. It's interesting that the article references his claimed defence was 'transphobia'. It's spelling out loud & clear that the gender ID stuff is a proxy for vile & violent misogynistic abuse of female members in the SNP.

I really wish that the press would push sturgeon on this. It's vile & shouldn't be easily brush under the carpet.

@WouldBeGood

The faithful don’t care anyway 🤷🏻‍♀️

I keep seeing this claim and it’s wrong. I’m a former SNP member, I do bloody care. I left the party over how they treated Joanna Cherry.